How Languages are Learned - 4th ed

SAVE OFFLINE

OXFORD lJNIVERSITY PRESS

Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, ox2 6DP,

United Kingdom Oxford University Press is a department ofthe University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade ma¡k ofOxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries @

Oxford University Press 2013

The moral rights ofthe autho¡ have been asserted

First published in zor3 2077 201.6 zo1.s 2014 2oa3

10987654327 AII rights reserved. No part ofthis publication may be reproduced, sto¡ed in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate repro$aphics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope ofthe above should be sent to the ELT Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this sarne condition on any acquirer

I(NOWLE DGE ME NTS

The authors cmd ptblisher are grar,efuI to those who hqve

given permksion to reproduce the following extracts and adaptations oJ copyight material: p.77 Extract from Language Delelowent and Language Disorders by

Lois Bloom and Margaret Lahey (1978). Macmillan Publishers; p.47 Figure Ílom'Some issues relating to the Monitor Model'by Stephen Krashen, On TESOI (1977). Reprinted by permission ofTESOL International Association; p.49 Extract from 'Constructing an acquisition-based procedure for second language assessment'by Manfred Pienemann, Malcolm Johnston, and Geoff Brindley irt Studies in Second Longuage Acqu$üofl , Volume 10/2, pp.277-a3 1988). Reproduced by permission of Cambridge University Press; p.53 Extract Ílom

'speeding up acquisition ofhisfter: Expücit L1/L2 contracts help' itSecond Language Acquisition and the Younger Learner: Child's Play? by Joanna

White

(2008) pp.193-228. With kind permission ofJohn Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam/ Philadelphia; p.54 Exhact ftom 'Second language

instruction does make a diffe¡ence'by Catherine Doughty in Studies in Second Language Acquisiüon, Volume 13/4, pp.431-69 (7991\. Reproduced by permission of Carnbridge University Press; p.1 36 Reprinted fr om In t ern ati on al J ournol of E duc aüonal Research, Volume 37 by Merrill Swain and Sharon tapkin'Talking it through: two French immersion learners' response to reformulations' Pp.285-304 (2002)with permission from Elsevier; p.139 Exüact from 'Corrective feedback and learner uptake'

Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials contained in any third party website

by Roy Lyster and Leila Ranta in Studies in Second Longuage Acquisition, Volume 7917 pp.37 -66 (7997). Reproduced by permission of Cambridge

referenced in this work

Cartoonsw: Sophie Grillet @ Oxford University Press 1993, 2005, and 2012.

Photocopying The Publisher grants permission for the

photocopying ofthose pages marked 'photocopiable' according to the following conditions. Individual purchasers may make copies for their own use or for use by classes that they teach. School purchasers may make copies for use by staffand students, but this permission does not extend to additional schools or branches Under no circumstances may any part ofthis book be photocopied for resale rsBN: 978 o 19 454126 8

Printed in China This book is printed on paper fiorn certified and well-rnanaged sources.

t

AC

University Press.

qJntu os PeuJBe[ e BrI4 4. ruorÍr,r ruoJJ stuePnls Pu" sJarlJeel arp

oI

soneru8er¿

t9

lSolouoq¿

89

a8en8ue¡ (sraureel Sulldureg

f;eunung

ZL ZL

Sulpear raqunJ .ro3 suolrsaSSng

C/

09 L9 loog

faqr pue rardeg: sr{t ur patuasard are Sulurea¡ (11)

atenSue¡ rsrg rnoge sarroarp IEre aS 'a8rn8ue¡ tsrg rrar{r a¡mb¡¿ uerpllql noq3o SulputtsJapun Jno lq pa:uangur uaeq ar'eq Sulqcear a8enSuel puocas put r{f,Jeasar a8en8ue¡ puooes r{1og asnef,eg ruerrodul sl punorSl:Eq slql 'pooqpplr l¡.rea ur Suru:ea¡ a8en8ue¡ uo ;ardeqr E qlr^\ sur8ag 1ooq eql 'pJuJEal e¡¿ sa8en8uel ,/v\or{Jo Sulpuersrapun Jno r{tr^\ tuelsrsuof, eJoru eJe leql slerr,r. ur uaqt rdepz or osp rnq sprJJtBru pue $looq -txal Surlsrxa aten[E^a or l¡uo rou ruaqr dlag leru rrr{r l{f,Jeesar uo¡usnbre a8rnSuq ar{rJo aruos ot-peouarredxa pue af,r^ou qroq-sJar{oral arnpoJrul ot sr looq srr{Uo ¡eo8 aq1 'spograu Sulql¿ar a8enSue¡ snoIrEAJo sluauodo¡d aperu srurelf, alenlele ol sJarlrBel Suld¡aq ur elqenl"^ osl¿ aJ¿ uorlrsrnb¡e a8en8ue¡ puof,as ul f;oagl pue qf,J"esal luoJj u,&\EJp wapl r¿qt e^elTag a1)N

fq

'sluapnls rrar{l Jo sanllge pur spaeu eqr Jo Surpuetsrapun Jlar{l sE lleff\ sE 'sluaruturoddrslp ro sassaoons snol^erd qtvtr ecual¡adxa u¡rro ¡Iaql $ suorsloep (sJar{feel uo ef,uengu¡ turuodul rsotu eqr 'aJns eq oI ¿sa3n3eJd ¡euorr -fnJlsur rueJe5rpJo ssaue nfaga p¡ruarod aql et¿np e ol sJer{3eel eJE.1v\oH 'tuetuoJ f,nuapef,E ar{r uo snf,oJ sluepnrs se l¡rruaplf,ul peureal eq il¡,l\ I{JEal ol runlperu 3¡asrr eBenBuEI arp ter{} uondu¡nsse aqr qrvy\ laueru rralgns eql eqr se pasn sl a8rn8uq puof,es ar{l 'sruooJsselc auos u1 'a8en8url ^\eu Sulsn a¡qz'r spalo¡d ¡o slser ul l¡er'lle¡adooc a8e8ua laqr sE sluepnts uea^\teg uonef,runruuro: (l¿Jnleu, sa8utnocua Jeqloue ra¡'san8o¡e¡p aJrlua ezlJoluaru pue seouelues tf,eJJof Jo las e aslr¡e.rd pue alellrm sluepnls 8ur,rerl3o an¡ert aqt sazseqdua reglouv 'slxJl lreJatl¡ 3u¡re¡suerl uI esn or fre¡nqtcort jo slsr pue reururer8jo sJlnr uJeal ot stuapnts seJlnbeJ q:eordde auo 'paruaru -a¡drur pur pasodord uaag a,req Surgceat aSen8uq or saqceordde lue¡¡ l¡a,rrrcaga ueql esn ol lsag rrer{r op or a Er{ oqtll sJal{rrar or parnqlJ}slp pu¿ paJepJo l¡durs are lagr 'sJrullatuos 'uolleluarua¡drul laqr ul 8ururc¡l alrsuetxa JoJ senrunlJoddo qrmt aruof, slEIJalEIu.lv\ou aql 'sauJllaurog 'uolSar E ur uorletuaua¡dul a}Blporurul JoJ paglJf,se¡d a.¡e saqceo:dde Jo loor{f,s aqt 'sase¡ furru uI 'aJoJaq auo8 aaeg rel{r asoqr u"ql a^Ipüa aJoul ^\au aq illr\r'laqr regr plor erE srrr{r"3J 'lSo8epad ¡o 's¡rlslnSuu 'l3o¡oqcfsd ur qf,Jeasar rsarel er{t uo pJS"q eq ol pIES ueuo are laqr 'parnpo¡tur e¡e 8ul -qreel a8en8ue¡ u8laro3 pup puores roJ qooqrxal pur spoqraur ldau uaql¡

NOIIfNCIOUINI

Innoduction

In Chapter 2 we look at second language learners' developing knowledge, their abiliry to use that knowledge, and how this compares with Ll learning. In Chapter 3, we rurn our attention to how individual learner characteristics may affect success. In Chapter 4, several theories that have been advanced to explain second language learning are presented and discussed. Chapter 5 begins with a comparison of naturd and instructional environments for second language learning.'We then examine some different ways in which researchers have observed and described teaching and learning practices in second language classrooms.

In Chapter 6, we examine six proposals that have been made for second language teaching. Examples of research related to each of the proposals are presented, leading to a discussion of the evidence available for assessing their effectiveness. The chapter ends with a discussion of what research findings suggest about the most effective ways to teach and learn a second language in the classroom. In Chapter 7, we will provide a general summary of the book by looking at how research can inform our response to some'popular opinions' about language learning and teaching that are introduced below.

A Glossary provides a quick reference for a number of terms that may be new or have specific technical meanings in the context of language acquisition research. Glossary words are shown in bold letters where they first appear in the text. For readers who would like to find out more, an annotated list of suggestions for further reading is included at the end of each chapter. The Bibliography provides full reference information for the suggested readings and all the works that are referred to in the text. 'W'e

have tried to present the information in a way that does not assume that readers are akeady familiar with research methods or theoretical issues in second language learning. Examples and case studies are included throughout the book to illustrate the research ideas. Many of the examples are taken from second language classrooms. \le have also included a number ofactivities for readers to practise some of the techniques of observation and analysis used in the research that we review in this book. At the end of each chapter are 'Questions for refection to help readers consolidate and expand their

understanding of the material.

Before we begin ... is probably true, as some have claimed, that most of us teach as we were taught or in awaythat matches our ideas and preferences about howwe learn. Take a moment to refect on your views about how languages are learned and what you think this means about how they should be taught. The statements

It

in the activity below summarize some popular opinions about language

os o

'seuo

xelduo) eJolaq

seJntrnJls a8en8ue¡ a¡durs qJeel Plnoqs sJeqf,eal | | 'Jaqloue

ol uo 3uto3 aJoleq euo

qf,ee

¡o sa¡dr,uexa as¡Dad plnoqs sJeuJeel Pu€'eutl e lp euo selnJ lellleuue"r8 luasa.ld PlnoLls sJeq)€al Ol 'sra¡eads el!}eu ql!^ suotl€sJeluof, ut ated¡r¡ued ,ftsea uer laqr'e8en8u€l e ,o ernDnJN ilseq eql Pu€ sPJo^

000'l

^

oDl sJeuJeal a)uo ó 'aSenBue¡ puof,as

eqt u! spunos lenpr^rpu! aql ¡¡e erunouord ol alqE eq ol sJeuJeal Jo, l€lluassa s! rl

I

'3utpea.t

q8no.rqr sr ,fue¡nqero,r /v\eu uJ€el

ol

,(e¡,r

lseq

eql

¿

'a8entue¡ m-rg

Jleqt

uo4 elueJeFetu! ol

anP aJ€ 3)eu sJeuJ€el e8en8ue¡ puof,as teqt selelslu eql ro 9

lso¡

'3uru;ea¡ ur ssaf,f,ns

,o pooqrle¿!l aql rateelt eql'seuu€J3o-rd ¡ooq:s

e

llq8lU

t

'uolle^ltour st uortlslnb¡e a8en8ue¡ Puof,es u! sse)fns ¡o ;ontpard lusuodLul rsou aql

S

eql

ur pe)npoJtut st aten8ue¡ Puofes P JallJeo

'sJeuJeal a8en8ue¡ poo8 a"re a¡doad rueS¡¡¡aru¡

a¡eu

'sJoJJe ¡er¡teuue;3

,(aqr ueq,r,r ueJpltql Sunol }¡a.l'¡or ,!¡ensn sluaJed Z

'uolletlru! q8no-rqr l¡ureu PeuJEel a;e sa8en8uel

¡

v vs aar8esrp l¡Suorrs-q5 teq^ euos aa-r8esrp-6 leq^ euos aa-r8e-Y ae.r8e ,!3uo;rs-y5 rnol qlrr* Peletf,osse xoq eql ul nol q)lq/v\ 01 luelxe aqt elerlPul

:uoruldo

¡

ue

Suqreu lq tuaualets q)ea

qr!^A aa.l3e

sluoruolels aseql uo uoluldo JnoÍ eAlD

Arl^lrcv

'Sulurea¡ a8en8ue¡ Puoias ul ,Goaql Pue q3Jeasal luoJJnf, rnoge Pear

nol sr punu ul rrJegl or suopf,EeJ rnol pue sluaruel?ls asaqr daal 'uorurdo gr", qri^ aarSeslp ¡o aa¡8e nol raqtaqr'r rnoqe lun{I 'Surgrear pue Sulurea¡ uo4Jnpo4uI

Introduction

l2

Learners'errors should be corrected as soon as they are made in order to prevent the formation of bad habits.

l3

Teachers should use materials that expose

students only to language structures they have already been taught.

l4

When learners are allowed to interact freely (for example, in group or pair activities), they copy each other's mistakes.

l5 ló

Students learn what they are taught. Teachers should respond to students'errors by correctly rephrasing what they have said rather than by explicitly pointing out the error.

l7

Students can learn both language and academic content (for example, science and history) simultaneously in classes where the subject matter is taught in their second language.

l8

Classrooms are good places to learn about language but not for learning how to use language.

Photocopiable @ Oxford University Press

¿a8en8ur¡ auo ueqr a¡otu a¡rnb¡e uerPllql tenSut¡t9

oP ./r\oH ¿PIro1( eql Punor¿ l¡re¡u¡s do¡a,rap eSenSur¡ PInp seoc ¿sasod -¡nd lsour JoJ lryssaDns sI uolleflunluruof, a¡duls f¡rea -uaqr g8noqr ua,ra a8en8uq ¡erlteruutr8 xa¡duro:8urdo¡a,rap uo oB ol uerPlrql seqsnd rer¡6

lnq 'sProlv\ uJml ol l¡uo rou salgeua r"qrh\ ¿srgr gsr¡druorre uarPllqr oP.u'oH 'suorle¡aua8:o3 srs¡8

¿salueluas ¡ry3ulueau ul raqlaSor ureqr rnd ol

pI,{¡

"

-o1oqilsd pue stslnSullJo uonuaue er{r Parf,EJrlB seq lEI{l auo-tta; Sulzeure ue sl a8en8ue¡ e Sulurea¡ 'paapul ',alq-elq, rsJg al{l PaJaDn seq p¡o-reaf-auo 'sargeg rrPloJo Sullqqrq asor{1rr sruarrd3o fol pur aprrd aqr ur arBl{s el/\ PuE a¿¡ dqeq Plo-qruou-e3rr{1 ,Eq-¿q-Eq, IEuoltesrs^uof aqr (re.¿!\suB, pue gSne¡ e lq apeul spunos eqr or arnsea¡d qlIA uetsll a¿¡ 'ruaurdole^aP u"runl{ Jo spadse 8u¡reutoseS pue a,rtssardlul lsolu eqr Jo auo sr uorlrsrnbre o8enSuel

uonrspbce a8entuel rsrl¡ 'looq slglJo snf,oJ aqr sr r{f,rr{1vr ,(WS) uorlrslnb¡e a8enSue¡ puof,asJo uorssnf,srp el{r JoJ uollsr -eda¡d e se f¡ruulud ,I{iJEasaJ sII{l ur slutod uleru d\al E uo l{f,nol or s¡ rardrqr sII{l ur asod¡nd Jno .ile^\ sE r{fJessJJ I"Jntlnf,-ssoJf, puE f,nsrnSur¡ssor:3o lpoq qru E sr erarp 'serllureJ umdorng PuE uEf,IJOlrtV I{lJoN ss"ll-alPPltu ul euop ueaq s"q qf,J"asar sII{r Jo qcnur g8noqr¡y 'aBenBuBI PIIqr uo l{rreesar .peuJEal sl aSenSue¡./v\or{ JoJ suoneueldxa Jo lunolue asuarurur uB sr aJer{I s" paraJo ueeq e Br{ tEqr serroar{l IErrAes rePlsuof, ueqr ilI^\ a4N 'uarPllql Sunol3o rueurdolalop aSrn8uq aqr re fgarrq lool ill1r\ ar* terdeqc slq] uI

^.er^eJd

COOHCITIHf,,TfUVE NI DNINUVfl-I flDVNDNVf

Language learning in early childhood

Tbef.rst three years: Milestones and deu e lopmental sequences One remarkable thing about first language acquisition is the high degree of similariry in the early language of children all over the world. Researchers have described developmental sequences for many aspects of first language acquisition. The earliest vocalizations are simply the involuntary crying that babies do when they are hungry or uncomfortable. Soon, however, we hear the cooing and gurgling sounds of contented babies, lying in their beds looking at fascinating shapes and movement around them. Even though they have little control over the sounds they make in these early weeks of life, infants are able to hear subtle differences between the sounds of human languages. Not only do they distinguish the voice of their mothers from those of other speakers, they also seem to recognize the language that was spoken around their mother before theywere born. Furthermore, in cleverly designed experiments, researchers have demonstrated that tiny babies are capable ofvery fine auditorydiscrimination. For example, they can hear the difference between sounds as similar as pa'and'ba'. Janet'ü7erker, Patricia Kuhl, and others have used new technologies that allow us to see how sensitive infants are to speech sounds. tü7'hat may seem even more remarkable is that infants stop making distinctions between sounds

that are not phonemic in the language that is spoken around them. For example, by the time they afe ayear old, babies who will become speakers of Arabic stop reacting to the difference between pa' and'ba'which is not phonemic in Arabic. Babies who regularly hear more than one language in their environment continue to respond to these differences for a longer period ('Werke¡ 'Weikum, and Yoshida 2006) . One important finding is that it is not enough for babies to hear language sounds from electronic devices. In order to learn-or retain-the abiliry to distinguish between sounds, they need to interact with a human speaker (Conboy and Kuhl 20II). The Internet abounds with remarkable videos of infants reacting to language sounds. rMhether they are becoming monolingual or bilingual children, however,

it will be many months before their own vocalizations begin to refect the characteristics ofthe language or languages they hear and longer still before they connect language sounds with specific meaning. However, by the end of their first year, most babies understand quite a few frequently repeated words in the language or languages spoken around them. Theywave when someone says 'bye-bye'; they clap when someone says pat-a-cake'; they eagerly hurry to the kitchen when 'juice and cookies' are mentioned.

At

12 months, most babies will have begun to produce a word or two that everyone recognizes. By the age of two, most children reliably produce at least 50 different words and some produce many more. About this dme, they begin to combine words into simple sentences such as 'Mommy juice' and

I

I

(

l

I

Í

:

t

-roru rr{t Jo eruos

(lddrg

sz

? Puz aql salf,rlr?

furuoyt¡) e¡ndoo

(req slppeq) s- a,rrssessod (tuam Áqeg) suro; rsed rep8arl

(qooq

ozvrr) s-

prn¡d

(Suruunr furuo¡lq) &ur aqssat8o¡d luesa¡d 'parpnls fagr saruaqd s.l$,oqs (11ooq

g.L6l su^&\org ruor3 pardepe) .vro¡aq tsIT eql

'aruanbas JEInuls t ur pa;lnbce eJalv\ sauragdroru ¡ecneruruer8 Vl ñqt PunoJ laqr (qereg pue 'elg 'ur"py pa¡ec) ue¡P¡gr oerqrJo tuaurdola,rap a8en8ue¡ aqr3o.,(pnrs purpn¡l8uol e uI 'sruaPnrs PuE san8ea¡or slq PuE u^\org raSo¿ fq rno paur¿f, se,/v\ serpnrs úv\oul-lsaq eI{Uo auo 'qsrÉug u¡ saruagd.roru ¡rr -neruu¡¿¡8 a¡mb¡e uarpllql .&\oq uo Pasnf,oJ sJatlf,JEesar FJs es 'lunql loerrof, aqr aonpord

ol anunuoo

¿rruos e^?q

eqrJo JaPJo

PJo,/\4,

I

lagl

¿sn{r a>III noÁ

'uolteuolul Sulsrr qru*'ef,uetuas alneJ"lseP al{r esn ueJPIIr{J 'suorlsanb ¡aeu sJolu 1se or urSag r{arp

w

7 a8ug ¿reqr ErEt1,N

esnef,aq

¿fppeq srraqr6

:qunql s" Peuftal uaaq arreq,bqr lf,eJJof,-suollsanb lce¡¡oo auros acnpotd leru laql 'arutl arues aql ly ¿1ooq

Áuruol J ¿aDIooJ

:uolleuolul Sursr qurtr sa3uelues pJo./v\-eeJq1 Jo -o1r\l a¡druls Jo sPJo¡a a¡8uls a:e suollsanb lseIIJEa

s¡arp[Y) ¡ a8atg

Footlplltp t(ltra ut Sututral a8anSuaT

T2

Language learning in early childhood

Therefore, we may find inversio n in yes/no questions but not tions, unless they are formulaic units such as "ü7'hatb that?' Stage

in wh-

ques-

5

At Stage 5, both wh- andyes/n questions are formed correctly. Are these your boots? \íhy did you do that? Does Daddy have a box?

Negative questions may still be a bit too difficult. \X/hy the teddy bear cant go outside?

And even though performance on most questions is correct, there is still one more hurdle. tWhen tuh- words appear in subordinate clauses or embedded questions, children overgeneralize the inverted form that would be correct for simple questions and produce sentences such as: Ask him why cant he go out. Stage

6

At this stage, children are able to correctly form all question types, including negative and complex embedded questions.

through developmental sequences does not always follow a steady uninterrupted path. Children appear to learn new things and then fall back on old patterns when there is added stress in a new situation or when they are using other new elements in their language. But the overall path takes them toward a closer and closer approximation of the language that is spoken Passage

I

I

&

around them.

1

Zhe

pre-scltoolyears

By the age of four, most children can ask questions, give commands, report real events, and create stories about imaginary ones, using correct word order and grammatical markers most of the time. In fact, it is generally accepted that by age four, children have acquired the basic structures of the language or languages spoken to them in these early years. Three- and four-year-olds continue to learn vocabulary at the rate of several words a day. They begin to acquire less frequent and more complex linguistic structures such as passives and relative clauses.

Much of children's language acquisition effort in the late pre-school years is spent in developing their ability to use language in a widening social environment. They use language in a greater variery of situations. They interact more often with unfamiliar adults. They begin to talk sensibly on the telephone to invisible grandparents (younger children do not understand that their telephone partner cannot see what they see). They acquire the aggressive or

c o ú

IlI oI TI nel

rez

'ca

iss

of

InL

rid

tr

d¡¡rue3 pue spuerrj rrar{r qlrrvr, aJeqs or ar'o¡ feqr qlrq./$ '.salpplJ pue 'suonsenb >1cur 'sa>1ol pror* ot ssef,f,E uaJplrr{f, sa¡.r8 Suru¿aru a¡dnpu a ¿r{ uEf sefualues puE spJolv\ reqr Sumou;¡ lrlnSlque se s8ulqr r{f,ns Jo &ertoosrp eqt sapnlf,ur osle sseuar?1(E cnsm8ul¡elary ¡Jeuor{s l¡rnuersgns sr stuasa¡da¡ rl rralgo egr q8noqr uaAe ',urBJJ, uer{l pJolvr Je8uo¡ e sr ,re¡¡ldralec, teql puetsJepun laql 'sr (asnor{, se lsnl 'prorrr e sr (ar{l, ter{t pu"rsJepun p¿aJ uer or{ \ uerplrgr 'sp¡o-reaf-aarr{r eTlun 'stuasa¡da¡ u Sulqr egt ruo{ etEJ

'8ulu¿aru

-¿das sl (pJo1r\, e rtqr SulpuetsJapun aqt sef,Jo3urer Sulpta¡ s¿ ila^\ sB ruJoJ seg a8en8url regr SuryurtsJapun .&\eu E ot ueJplrql spea¡ a8ed e uo s¡oqruls rer.llo pue sJouel lg paruasardal spJoa Sulaag 'sseuaJr^re rnsrn8url -Eleru ol rsoog;ofuur ¿ sa¡tr8 peeJ or Sulureal 's^r'ro¡8 pue spuedxa lr¡lqe srgl 's;eal ¡ooqcs aql ut pue 'sreaf loogcs-ard agt ur s8urueeru u1r\o rraqt ssardxa aSen8ue¡ asn ol lrlllq" aqr do¡a,rap uaJpllr{f

J

J a

3

S

S

o S

a

P J 1

ol pue srar{lo puelsJepun or

sffia[ Iooqrs aql

ll ,

'looqls or oB fagr arun eql lg aroru ro srnor{ 000'02 JoJ tuau¡uoJr^ue JrerFJo a8en8ue¡ eqr qrr^\ tf,¿luof, ul are larp ltr{l eterurlse l¿ru a¡r' 'lep e srnoq e la \r Jo uat JoJ a>p./v\E arc uaJplll{f, JI 'stuaruuoJl^ua qolr-a8en8ue¡ ul puads uerplrqf, snoq lurur r'rog rsnl nof zvroqs III^ esllraxe

s

a8en8ue¡ pue a8enSurl Sulsn 3o s&¡rr ¡'rau sa.rrnba¡ Suuas Iooqls aql roJ sllDIS pur a8pa¡r'tou¡ xa¡duo: a¡rnb¡e uarplrr{r ¡oor¡cs-ard q8noqr¡y

u

'luarudo¡ar'ap a8enSuel JoJ sonrunlJoddo ¡'rau s8u¡rq pur e8en8uel (asn

'uorsr^elar Suryrreztr 'ol pear Surag 'suoltesrarr I¿f,ntuer{reru >1:rnb y -uo3 (sJJqlo uo Sulddorpsalea 'suonesJa uof, ur Sull¿dlrlrred-a8en8ue¡ spu"snor¡r ruads a^¿q ueJpllqr reql lgr.ror'r qrvn SunceJerul srnor{ Jo sl s:eal ¡oorl:s-ard eqr ur uolllslnbce a8rn8url

'fta

-alou osle sr lI 'elrssaJdrur

'(punoJe ft¡rr 3uo¡¡tr aqt, sr Jarpo eqr rnq

lillt, tl auo l"ql nol ¡ar uec lagl

'(l?a er{l e>pf,, ruo5 le,rn tuareglp ¿ ul 8uo¡¡'¡. sr (Jrer{J aql {uIJp, rEI{r r'rortl 'pueq raqto eqt uo 'sp¡o-reaf-arrr{ 'suearü rr r"q.ü puersJapun uec faqr rrrp 13BJ rr{r uo l¡urcu sncoS ¡lrv' laqr rnq 'ppo llq e s,u .r*ou1 lagr reqr rrroqs leur leql 'l qrwr Suorrvr, Sulqrlue s erar{l reqr aJns ssel eJE lagl ',lea aqt a1to, fes Ja^au ppol'r faqr g8noqrp ta e./ú\oH 'asuas a>pru r,usaop tI asn"f,eg ',JIBqf aqt >lurrp, fes or f¡ls, s,rr rerp nof ¡ar uEf, uarpllqr p1o-.real-aarq¡ 'sla,ruo: tr Suru¿aru eqr ruo5 ete¡edas roalqo ue sr aBenBuEI r"oJr or óITr9e al{l 'sseu

-a¡e¿rre:nsrnSu[elau do¡a,rap or ulSag

l: e

os[B ueJplrr{J 'sreaf ¡ooqcs-ard aqr u¡

'sarJel aroldxa larp lgr'.r lroq or ur8aq a8en8ue¡ pur pu"tsJepun put &¡d puarard fagr mog pue

'ftrvr sr¡r

uI '(se3ro^ ruaJ$lp

asaqr 8u¡sn asnce;d

faql

r{3ll{,/v\

arerogele ur a8pa¡.,'ron1 srql asn laqr pue laqro q:ea or serqsq or lpr

faql

srlnPe

^/y\oq ue3.&\tag

ur

lpr

ef,uaJaJIP aqr Paur?al ar'rq laqr 13Ip /{ogs

'punor8le¡d aql ur sfor rregr puaJap or pepaau

?ooqflltf [lraa wSutunal

sI

rrr{r e8en8ue¡ 8ur¡ofu:

aSan&uaT

t4

Language learning in early childhood

One of the most impressive aspects of language development in the school years is the astonishing growth ofvocabulary. Children enter school with the

ability to understand and produce several thousand words, and thousands more will be learned at school. In both the spoken and written language at school, words such as 'homework' or'ruler' appear frequently in situations where their meaning is either immediately or gradually revealed.'Words like population or'latirude' occur less frequently, but they are made important by their significance in academic subject matter. Vocabulary grows at a rate of between several hundred and more than a thousand words e year, depending mainly on how much and how widely children read (Nagy, Herman, andAnderson 1985). The kind ofvocabulary growth required for school success is likely to come from both reading for assignments and reading for pleasure, whether narrative or non-fiction. Dee Gardner (2004) suggests that reading avariety oftext types is an essential part of vocabulary growth. His research has shown how the range of vocabulary in narrative texts is different from that in non-fiction. There are words in non-fiction texts that are unlikely to occur in stories or novels. In addition, non-fiction tends to include more opportunities to see a word in its different forms (for example, 'mummy', 'mummies', 'mummified').Th. importance of reading for vocabulary growth is seen when observant parents report a child using a new word but mispronouncing it in a way that reveals it has been encountered only in written form. Another important development in the school years

is the

acquisition of dif-

ferent language registers. Children learn how written language differs from spoken language, how the language used to speak to the principal is different from the language of the playground, how the language of a science report is different from the language of a narrative. As Terry Piper (2006) and others have documented, some children will have even more to learn if they come to school speaking an ethnic or regional variety ofthe school language that is quite different from the one used by the teacher. They will have to learn that another variety, often referred to as the standard variety, is required for successful academic work. Other children arrive at school speaking a different language altogether. For these children, the work of language learning in the 'W'e will early school years presents additional opportunities and challenges. in bilingualism early childhood. return to this topic when we discuss

Explaining first language acquisition from infancy through the early school years show that we have considerable knowledge of tahat children learn in their early language development. More controversid, howeve¡ are questions about how this development takes place. rVhat abilities does the child bring to the task and what are the contributions of the environment?

These descriptions of language development

Sl

pue

¿(>pnn ar{t)

ll

or Pauaddeq

leqAt

dunq 'slaarl[\

¿

'aJorü

alr{^/$,

,\srvrr (rerr¡)

'1cnrr

]f,nrr dtunq ar¡o laD

plf,nJt dunp eqr ul sleeq/( e¡ou¡ lnd euuo8

'uo

lsrr¿ 'sr¡npe o^\r

>l3nrr dulnp e qrl^\

Surlqd

sr

dirrild sIo'I utrrad

lool

J A

u A1

pnrr ulrqre¡ (1cnrr rno 8ur¡er) lf,nJr ta) 'uIEJl oor{3 leD 'aJou ra8 1 (xoq ut Sutgcreas) N,runrvx

oor{f, aJoru oN 'eJoru

B

(:agraSor

l

srnd sro.1¡

'r*og nol r'roqs IIloo'I 'lr op uEf, noÁ 'll op uer noÁ ';4O sIo'I I 'sn{r op 1 (raqraSor urc¡l tnd ot sJ33 o-1r\l tno 8ur¡er) N,\uHrvx 'srqr op

8uú-u) 'slqr op rue,& I 'srqt oC (ulerr3o

('roog eqr uo

epIIS aqr stnd

ulrgru¡)

'srqr oP 'sFlL'roou uo u1(oP rnd N,\)rHrvx I sIo'I rBIl!\^\oDl nol qg 'sI rEI{r

'ulerl ool{3 ool{f, I{11.&\ ¿srql EtErL[\'le¡d rue¿6 (epls tno Stqtt) 'urerr ool{f, ool{f, qrv't le¡d turt\ I (8eq ro3 Surqeee-r) NTUHII'}I &¡d ruem I 'urerl ooqr oor{f, al{r rr¡8norq sIo'I'sa SIO'I ¿urrrl ooqr ool{l eqr rq8norq sIo-I ¿ool{r ooq3 ¿s,{or 8ur-rq 1 NA)THIYX ¿rqSnorq

1

slot aqr

aas

nof pl6l

(sqruour

SIO'I

V7)uthqYY

'sro-I aql ut arnorrd PuB urirgrr¡ uJJ \leq uollssJa^uo:8urno¡o; pue uonerrrul 3o saldruzxa al{l TJPISuoJ'luaf, rad 91 ueql ssal rE Parelm -lm uaaq seq tered pue lpur3 Jo rEI{r or a¡geredurof, elrr e re papaacord luaudo¡autap esoq,/ra 'uaJPIItls JaIPo Jo q:aads eql uI uollelllul Jo lunour¿

aql 'p¡p fprlf put rared se I{f,nru se asrlcr¡d PuE ele}llil uarPllqr IIE roN 'tuaruuorr^ua aqr lq uErF ral{}Er pll{c aqt aplst{ Surgtauos fg paulrurarep peruaes asrlce¡d Pue alelllul ol ]Erl^Uo alrol{o aIP '/lres a^\ se 'os ue,rg 'uoltlslnb¡e e8en8ue¡ 3o uorreue¡dxe lslJnoll?qaq eW rered ruorj qraeds jo sa¡dues aq1 or r¡oddns oruos pual ot ruaes lPttl PuB '¡oBuuroru, lpuarrnr $ aqs teq,t\ uo pasnroJ aq or .readde a¡lpe¡d PuE uoIlelIIUI JaI{ lared e{ll ,teql sl 8ur¡ns lsouI sI IP(LA'IISI^ lsel slsle¿ efuls uaas lou PEII

P UI

ls af,

e

aB Sn

sP

a3

Át

q Je

aqs 1ooq agr ul aSed aqt or rq8le.tts suJnl Pue ralsl >lea^\ E üossel aSenSue¡, aql sJaqruaueJ el{s letlt sr Surlsa¡alul lsolu sdeqra¿ isessElf, a8en8ue¡ u8ra;o; eruos uI tuepnrs E a>lll spunos reqr lem e uI saJnlJnJls PUE sPJo/( d\au sasll -cerd aqg 'uotllsrnbrr a8tn8ue¡ req uo preq Suurortr aq or sreadde fPtlf,

?ootl?l?qr lpaa ut &urutua1 a8anSuaT

18

Language learning in early childhood

Thus, children vary in the amounr of imitation rhey do. In addition, many of the things they say show that they are using language creativel¡ not just repeating what they have heard. This is evident in the following e*ampl.r.

Patterns in knguage The first example shows a child in the process of learning pamerns in language, in this case the rules of word formation, and overgeneralizing them to new contexts. Randall (36 months) had a sore on his hand.

MoTHER M"yb. we need to take you to the doctor. RANDALL \7'hy? So he can doc mylittle bump? Randall forms the verb 'doc' from the noun 'doctor', by analogy with farmers who farm, swimmers who swim, and actors who act.

the ptates oo

/Yon ,q¿a,^, I n+E the ptates oitte

t *¡c tatle !

\'te.btc.,-

fNor l putd.-

W"!,1!br rrysetÍ !

(

I I d

{ Focus onmeaning

ts

Even older children have to work out some puzzles, for example, when familiar language is used in unfamiliar ways, as in the example below. vhen David (5 years, 1 month) was ar his older sister's birthday parry, toasrs were proposed with grape juice in stemmed glasses:

FATHER I d like ro propose

a roasr.

Several minutes later, David raised his glass:

DAvrD

I d like ro propose a piece of bread.

only when laughter

sent David slinking from the table did the group realize that he wasnt intentionally making a play on words! He was concentraring

k

lllfr

¿5

g

m d(

let

6I

'uollrsrnbfe a8en8ue¡ JoJ suoneueldxa ruaraglp

JoJ

3 ez

>lool ol sJar{rJresal pel

suonelruJrl asaql 'arlnbf,E ueJplrr{f ter{t JEruruE.rB xa¡duroo eJotu ar{lJo uog -rsrnbrr erlt JoJ uoneue¡dxa,ftotcrSsnrs r tou sr rusrJnor^Er{eq lrf,rsself, '.a>fertr ueiplrql t"ql uonpzrprauaSra,l,o Jo slJos aqr Surureldxa ot ,(rr'r, aruos saoB rusrrnor^Eqaq q8noqr¡e puv 'tol ? eletrurr oq,/!\ asoqr se l¡prde.r pue f11ry se a8en8ue¡ a¡lnb¡¿ uouetrulr IJJ^o elurl op oq,&\ ueJplrql 1a^eaoH 'saSets tsar¡ -rea aqr re fllelcadsa 'a3en3ue13o slradse aulrno: pur re¡n8eJ eqrJo aruos uJ?el ueJplrr{f,./(oq Surpuersrapunjo lem alqruoseal E JeJo ot sruees rusrJnorler{eg

-o

PI

1I

'lf,eJJof, l¡ensn aJE seouatuas,/!\au Jraql 'spJo,s uauo a¡qrsuegarduroc pue feql 'slxaluof, 1v\eu ol ueql azrlEJauaS pw

JO SaSn 1v\eu JO STuJOJ l1\eu atearc

su¡aued lno >pld or ;raddt uarplrql 'reqre¡ 'stlnpe ruoU preaq a,reg laqr r¿{¡ saf,ualuasJo suortnada¡ l¡a.rau lou tre laql'uarp¡¡¡r lq parea-rr sruJoJ Jrp '8ulurca¡ a8en8uel 3o Jo aruos urc¡dxa louuer euole rfnfe.rd pue uonelnul ssa:o¡d aql uo l'ropuuvi E g1r^\ sn aplrro;d q:aads suarplrqrJo saldruexa asaql

\

'lf,aga pue asnef Jo JapJo ar{t se8uego [l pro^\ E.&\oq pu"tsrapun raf rou prp eH 'rsr5 pres aq r"g./ü ErEI{r os 'sPueq srq

Áp or parduaue IIEpuEU ero1ag pereaddesrp sla^\ol eqt lse (sqruoru 6

IU

-

',peaJgJo acard e, 'rur(uoufs-¡tau lua¡edd¿

Jq srr qlv'r paoe¡dar aq rou plnoJ pu¿ lseor ewBS aqt lou stl't-(tsror -^\au>I rq8noqr arl pro^{ aq1 tEIp azrlear or pelle3 aI{ rEI{r ,' ' ' asodord or aTI p(I, uols -sa¡dxa f,r¿lnruroJ ar{r pue a¡nlsa8 rvrau SuneurcsE agr Sunurol¡ad uo pr"I{ os

ls

l

pooqpl?tp f,1wa utBuruwal a3an3ua7

20

Language learning in early childhood

7h e

innatist p ersp ectiue

Noam Chomsky is one of the most infuential figures in linguistics, and his ideas about how language is acquired and how it is stored in the mind sparked a revolution in many aspecrs of linguistics and psychology, including the study of language acquisition. The innatist perspective is related to Chomsky's hypothesis that all human languages are based on some innate universal principles.

In his 1959 review of B. F. Skinnert book Wrbal Behauior, Chomsky challenged the behaviourist explanation for language acquisition. He argued that children are biologically programmed for language and that language develops in the child in just the same way rhar orher biological functions develop. For example, every child will learn to walk as long as adequate nourishment and reasonable freedom of movement are provided. The child does not have to be taught. Most children learn to walk at about the same age, and walking is essentially the same in all normal human beings. For Chomsky, language

acquisition is very similar. The environment makes only a basic contribution-in this case, the availabiliry of people who speak to the child. The child, or rather, the childk biological endowment, will do the rest. Chomsky argued that the behaviourist theory failed ro account for 'the logical problem oflanguage acquisition'-the fact that children come to know more about the structure oftheir language than they could reasonably be expected to learn on the basis of the samples of language they hear. The language children are exposed to includes false starts, incomplete sentences, and slips of the tongue, and yet they learn to distinguish between grammatical and ungrammatical sentences. He concluded that childrenk minds are not blank slates to be filled by imitating language they hear in the enyironment. Instead, he hypothesized, children are born with a specific innate abiliry to discover for themselves the underlying rules of a language sysrem on the basis of the samples of a natural language they are exposed to. This innare endowmenr was seen as a sort of template, containing the principles that are universal to all human languages. This universal grammar (UG) would prevenr the child from pursuing all sorts of wrong hypotheses about how language sysrems might work. If children are pre-equipped with UG, then what they have to learn is the ways in which the language they are acquiring makes use of these

principles. Consider the following sentences, from a book by Lydia \X/h ite ( 1 9 8 9). These English sentences contain the reflexive pronoun'himself'. Both the pronoun and the noun it refers to (the antecedent) are printed in italics. (An asterisk at the beginning of a sentence indicates that the sentence is ungrammatical.)

a John

b

saw himself

*HimselfsawJohn.

I

{

I I

i I

ir

n

I

h

ir

si

a(

oi

qr

w

IZ

'ureqr qrl^\ rf,Eralul aldoad qrq.r ur sluaruuorrlua ur dn rq8no.rq are laqr3l srualsls a8en8ut¡ xa¡duroc armb do¡e,rap ór¡lge e,urruSor parnul¡,Ga,r qtl\{ ueJp¡qr ua^g 'a8enSue¡ ualods3o uolusrnboe s¡a-rp¡gc SurJEer{ ot Jelrrurs sl ruetsls aSenSur¡ regr3o uortrsmb:u aqr ur ssa¡3o¡d Jraqr pu" 'fruejur ur tr ol pasodxa are faqr 3r a8rn8uel u8.rs ureel llrlv\JEap llpuno3ord arc oqz'r ua¡pllgf, 'ólunruruor ¡en8ur¡r¡nur e m a,rr¡ fagrSl a8rn8ur¡ auo uer{t eJoru ro-e8rn8ue¡ a nru rlaqr armbce I¡¡S -sseflns uaJplrql il" rsotule r¿qr rrEJ aqr sazlseqdrua a,rn¡ads¡ad tslteuul aq1 'uo¡r¡s¡nbre a8en8uq ro3 lla,rrsn¡cxe pasn sI usruer{f,eru ateum er{r rer{r aJoruJaqunJ azrsagtodlq faql 'rndul Jr{lJo suon¿trurT Jo alds m xeruls xalduo: qf,ns relof,srp ot uaqr s \olle reqt a8pe¡mou>l ro rusruer{rarrr al¿uur eruos e^Er{ rsnu laqr 'tuaruuoJrlua Jrar{} jo a8en8uq aqr a.rmbru uarplrqr IIE erurs trr{r ezr$qrodlq laq¡ 'lndur eqt ur alqelr¿,rr secualuas 3w -sn¡e.rd pue SunernulJo srseq eqr uo l¡a.rnd paur"al aq Ja au p¡nor reruure-6 xa¡duroc r{Jns terir an3¡e a¡.rtcads¡ad lsneuur ar{l ruo{ uonrsrnbf,E a8rn8uu¡ lpnrs oqru. sreqoreesa¿ 'srar{lo aql Jo ólTe¡neurue;8un aqt azuSorer pun saf,ualuas ¡ecrreruurerS aqr ra.tdratur lpcauoc or alqe aq plno^\ uarpllq: e8e-¡ooqos lsour 'taÁ 'ler'r aqr 8uo¡e sror;a e>leru op uerpllql pue 'uJEal o¡ p.leg lra,r aq plno \ tl suaes 'ólxa¡duol Jo pury sryr rE >lool a^{ uaqlil

l

er{r eJar{^\

(>1)

'tlasunr¡ ¡o a¡nt¡rd e ¿qft{ pa,&\oqs ¿utlo[ l :lllg ro uqof raqrta ol reJar Plnos a^Ixaua¡ ur se 'a¡glssod sr luepaf,etue euo u€ql aJoru 'sasef, aruos uI '

(asnr¡r alug) rua8t¡arur

sr.!1 a

sutt t¡ *tp sarayTag utl of *

'(asne¡c auug-uou) rua8r¡arur aqotllasuttc¡ sa€Ileg

sr

l¡ens¡

pesFuorduqof q

:Jar{lra >lJo \ l rJo \ alnJ sII{r tegt s tol{s (g) 'ra,razvro¡1 'luaPef unouo¡d elrxageJ aql or rsesolf, unou aqr rrr{r epnl3uoJ rq8lru a,n

^/\olloJ

ur.1

of satoq!1a sruxq relJe

lsnur unouord ar'rxagar er{rJr

sE

$lool

ll

urlof* t ¡

ugof

uqof*

3ur¡oo1

(.IB >ISIJ

unc esat

ase 01

suJ PIrJ

or

lUer

eql Ja^( .P?

lu PU

rdr a?

PA eJo

F]

(

u7o[ t

'(f) ul tou lnq (l) ur uorlrsod rcalqns eqr ur aq uEf, a^Ixegar eql 'eJourJal{unJ '(q) se lou tng '(p) pu¿ (e) ur se luapaf,elue otp sB esnrlr aIUES atp "l 'slervr¡e 'r¿qr ueql parecr¡duoc eJoru ua^a Erl puy

ur aq tsnru e rxegal aqr

'fiasru1q qser'r ot IIIS

-alue aqr

lasryr¡ qsr.l$olrugplol tlasu,nq qsel,l'otlltg p¡or tlasu,ttr1 peTI porC rer{r prcs

eqI -n e8

3.tI a^ 1U

'd -la lEI

.I3

a

t1asryr¡ p¿1;lr.ati ter{t ples ur{o[ p :s" qf,ns safueluas JePrsuos eaJJ '

r

tng 'ot sra;ar '(q) pur (e) u1

:srqr sar'ordsp (c)

ll unou arF

elE

or -Pr Pu Pu

?ooqnltp tltaa ut Sututaal a3on3uo7

22

Language learning in early childhood

Children acquire the basic syntax and morphology of the language spoken to them in a variety of conditions, some ofwhich would be expected to enhance language development (for example, caring, attentive parents who focus on the childb language), and some which might be expected to inhibit it (for example, abusive or rejecting parents). Children achieve different levels of vocabulary creativiry social grace, and so on, but virtually all achieve the abiliry to use the patterns of the language or languages spoken to them. This is seen as support for the hypothesis that language is somehow separate from other aspects ofcognitive development and may depend on a specific module of the brain. The

Critical Period Hypotltesis

The innatist perspective is often linked to the Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH)-the hypothesis that animals, including humans, are genetically programmed to acquire certain kinds of knowledge and skill at specific times in life. Beyond those 'critical periods', it is either difficult or impossible to acquire those abilities.'S7'ith regard to language, the CPH suggests that children who are not given access to language in infancy and early childhood (because ofdeafness or extreme isolation)

will never acquire language if these

deprivations go on for too long.

It

is

difficult to find evidence for or against the CPH, since nearly all children

are exposed to language at an early age. However, history has documented a few'natural experiments'where children have been deprived of contact with

language. Two of the most famous cases are those of 'Victor' and'Genie'.

ln

1799, a boy who became known as Victor was found wandering naked in the woods in France. His storywas dramatized ina1970 film by Frangois Thuffaut called L'enfant sauuage (TheWild Child). 'Whe n Vctor was captured, he was about 12 years old and completely wild, apparently having had no contact with humans. Jean-Marc-Gaspard Itard, a young doctor accustomed to working with deaf children, devoted five years to socializing Victor and trying to teach him language. Although he succeeded to some extent in developing Victort sociabiliry memory and judgement, there was little progress in his language abiliry.

Neárly 200 years later, Genie, a I3-year-old girl who had been isolated, neglected, and abused, was discovered in California. Because of the irrational demands of a disturbed father and the submission and fear of an abused mother, Genie had spent more than 11 years tied to a chair or a crib in a small, darkened room. Her father had forbidden his wife and son to speak to Genie and had himself only growled and barked at her. She was beaten when she made any kind of noise, and she had long since resorted to complete silence. Genie was undeveloped physically, emotionall¡ and intellectually. She had no language.

87,

lEr{l pepnlfuof, sJar{f,rEasal aql'dno;8 arsT arp ueqr l¡ruarsrsuof, sJotu Il¡aqt pasn 'uJnl uI 'oq^\ dno.l8,(¡reg aqr uegr.{¡ruarslsuor Jrolu sJa>lr¿lu eql Pasn

dno¡8 a^IIBN ar{t 'sJa>lJ?ru p:ntruruer8 uo SutsnroS sls31 uo larta,"log 'a8pa -prou¡ f-rqng"f,ol ur a¡durexa.lo3 ,.ISVJo asn rIeI{rJo stf,eds" eluos uI sdno¡8 eql uea^\rag af,ueJeJlp ou PunoJ lt,1¡ '(Zt a8e lar3e 15y Sururea¡ ue8aq or¡,,v'.) s.reu8rs arET pue '(a8e 3o s¡eal xrs Pue JnoJ uaa^\lJq 15y 8u¡sn ue8aq oqm) srauSls fl.rrg '(,{rtlq urorj TSV or pasodxa aram, ogrvr,) s¡au8rs a^IleN

pareduroc

laql

's.raryru I¿f,Iterururr8 puaqarduos PUE acnpord 01 'ISVJo

srasnJEaPJo lrnlqB al{r PaIPnrs san8ea¡oc rel{ PuE (Oee

t) rrodrv'a¡

rssr¡g

'sfuarua,roru fPoq

Jo pu"q cg¡rads q8no;gr passardxa are sJe1Jelu asaql 'Jequnu put (asual rt"á ,r¡á*"*a ro3) ault se s8urqr r{fns attf,rpur ot sra>lJeru ¡m¡reuruer8 3o (15y) aEun8uul uSrg ueJrJerrrv'sa8en8url uatllJ/t\ PUE PJo ell-I asn sa>lpru

'Hdf al{i ol Par¿ler l{f,rEasar lueuodrut atuosJo rcalqns agt uaaq seq aSen8ue¡ u8ls Sururea¡ ul acuauadxa ralEl s,uarpllqr esaql'PIql aql ol rlqlssaf,f,e sI lBr{r aSrnSue¡3o PIo^eP lnq sfe,vr tsotu uI Flurou aq leru pouad PooqP¡ql f¡rea arp 'sng1 'lzr* Frurou fpua.redde uE ur lfEJalur 01 sssues Jer{lo sasn pln{t eql asnBf,eq JEaq louuef, pplr rlaqt lrr{t ozllear tou feru stua¡ed Sutreag 'I{uIq ruory'ISV ol pasodxa áq ór l¡at¡¡ eJE uerplll{r asaqr l¡uo pue 'sluarzd1"aP or urog srEJeaP f¡puno3 -ord aqr Jo luer rad g1-g l¡ug 'slualed Sulreaq a^EI{ oq.,'r _uarPIII{l JEáP .aru' f¡punoSoid oruos roJ asrr agt sl slql Iensn ar¡r re aBenBuEI or ssrrrr ri"q ro,, op ral ,slua¡¿d Jrarp ruog aJef, pue JAol a^Ief,al lagr araqn saruoq 1¡ou euros oq,/ú uarplrqf,Jo asm eql sI HdJ olpJo rser arel¡do¡dde aro.'' v .uonf,eJelur uerunr{ a;arrr faqr aJoJag uela 'luetu IEruJou ruog PereJedas -¡ledrur a8en8uq rgnads e ro ,sle¡ap ¡eruaudo¡anaP 'aBBtuEP uIEJg luory suI(UJJleP o1 elglssod rou sl r1 'a8tn8ue¡ PsreJns uraql Jo JeI{rIa Jaq]3q,/v\ .rr"q or lr¡¡qeul Jrar{l ol pernqrrruof, a,req tgSnu lrrJnleur ¡rer3o¡orq saPISaq sJolf,?J Jaqro req \ /(ouI louuB3 al|t 'seseJ lBnsnun IPns tuog ef,uaPl^a Jo srs€g aqt uo peurguor sl sseqrod,,(q aqr reqr an8;r ol lFlgJIP sl ll 'HdJ rolf,I¡ g8noql¡y ,qr jo i¡oddns .rt ,r,rtpt,tt apv.,'ord ot ¡eadde alua9 PuE

'qraads aultnoJ

'uolr pu? f,rElnluJoJ pesnJe^o pue fFuarsrsuosur stuJoJ pcrrru[ue;8 Pasn eqs ltttpotá put-uolsuaqa¡duoc uae \leq dr8 purou uer¡r 1a3rc1 E se,r\ eral{I .p¡ó reaf-a,rg pordlr eJo tEr{l aIII rou ser'r a8en8uel s,alua) 'a8en8_ue1 ol arns -'od"r jo tr"rf r,tg JaUE ,ssalaqlJa^eN 'stIBJl PuE selsel IEnP_I^lPul SuoJls Pu¿ sdqsuonr¡a.r puosrad daap pado¡a^ap aqs 'arE.&rB fla,rruuSoc PuE PazllBlf,os Sulurocag ul ssa¡8o¡d alge>IJ¿tueJ sPrru elua) 'slooqrs ¡rtcads PaPueuE PUE auoq JatsoJ ¿ uI Pa^II eqs 'erlua3 uoIlElITIqEqaJ 3 uI po¡rad JaIJq E J3!V .(LL6l) ssunJ .t"*g Snrpr¡rul ,slsrderaql pue srar{f,Eet lueur3o uoltedl¡lt

-red aqr qtl^\ Palef,nPa PII? roJ PeJEf PooqPl

ltp,Qna

sE,&\

eluaD 'POraAof,sIP

sEl(\ aqs JeUV

ur Sututaa. aSanfuuaT

24

Language learning in early chi ldhood

their study supports the hypothesis that there is a critical period for first language acquisition, whether that language is oral or gestural.

Another line of research that has given new insight into the importance of early language experience comes from studies of international adoptees.' These aré children who were adopted at an early age by families who did not speak the language rhe child had heard during infancy. In their review of rtudi.r of international adoptees, Johanne Paradis, Fred Genesee, and Martha Crago (201 1) concluded that cognitive and linguistic outcomes were generally veiy positive. Some comparisons of their language with that of .hildr.tr the same age who had always heard the same language showed that subtle differences persist even after seyeral years, but these are not the kinds of differences that most people would notice. Here again, of course, one cannot know whethef something other than a late exposure to the language spoken in the adoptive environment also contributed to differences between these children and others who did not experience an abrupt change in their Ianguage environment. Nevertheless, with continuing research on childrent linguisiic behaviours and intuitions, as well as the neurological studies of infánts' speech perception that we saw above, it is becoming clearer that lattguageácquisition begins ar birth, and possibly even before, as the child's brain is shaped by exposure to the language(s) in the environment. The innatist perspectiye is thus partly based on evidence that there is a critical period foi l"ngu"ge acquisition. It is also seen as an explanation for 'the

logical problem oil"ng,r"g. acquisition', that is, the qu_estion of how adult rp-."k ri come to know the complex structure of their first language on the basis of the limited samples of language to which they are exposed.

Interactionist/ dea e lop m ental p ersp e ctiu es Developmental and cognitive psychologists have focused on the interplay the innate learning ability of children and the environment in which th"t the innatists place too much emphasis on the they develop. Th.y "rg,r. (th..o-p.t"nce 'final state' of adult native speakers) and not enough on the developmental aspects oflanguage acquisition. In theirview,language acquisition istut one example of the human childt ability to learn from experience,

b.t*..r,

and they see no needto assume that there are specific brain structures devoted to language acquisition. They hJpothesize that what children need to know is in the language they are exposed to as they hear it used in ",raifable thousanis of hours of interactions with the people and objects around them.

.rr.rály

Psychologists attribute considerably more importance to the environment than the lnnatists do even though they also recognize a powerful learning mechanism in the human brain. They see language acquisition as similar to and infuenced by the acquisition of other kinds of skill and knowledge, rarher than as something that is different from and largely independent of

97

'7 raldEr{J ur

aes

III¡\ a¡vr se 'tuarudo¡a,rap a8en8uel puofas uo r{fJBaseJ ur IEJtuef l¡Sursea;:ur aluofeg a^?q s./rrar^ slrsto8l¡ 'uorlJeJatur lElf,os ul pa8rarua qcaads pue 'qcaads pazr¡eu;arur l¡enuassa srr'rrg8noqr .Alsto8l¡roC 'plro^\ IEclsfgd aqr qll \ uonf,Ererur g8norgl paJrnbre e8pa¡non1 ssa¡dxa ol pesn eq plnof, ter{r u¡elsls ¡oqruls e s¿ a8¿n8ue¡ rtr,es ra8el¿ 's.re8el¿ ruog sJa5rp,r*al,r sÁ1sto8l¡ 'a8pa¡zrroul ¡'rau a¡lnbce ot osle pue e^Eq lagr a8pa¡zrroul aWJo lsoru Jr{t arytu uaqr sdlaq reqr ernlf,nJls a,rnroddns3o pur¡ e .sr trgl ,8u¡p¡o3 -J"f,s r{rr.&\ plql or1r apr,rord suonesra^uor ag1 'rq8noqt pue a8en8ue¡ qroq 3o sulSrro eqt suonrsJJ^uor esaqt ur 1r\Bs pue uarplrq) reqto qrv( pue sllnpE qrr^\ a^Er{ uerplrr{J ler{t suontsreluof,Jo e¡uet¡odrul eqr pe rJsqo l¡sro8l¡

'KJ¿n luaudo¡a,rap purxord¡o auoz aqt se f¡ruapuadapur Surop3o alqedec aq p¡nomfaqr utqr eroru op plnof, uarplrrir r{llqr\ ul arr¡d ¡e:lroqderaru e or perreJer llslo8l¡ 'erueurro3red pur a8pa¡ru,oul Jo slar'a1 rag8rq 01 arue pB or alqe aJ¿ ueJplrr{J 'luJruuoJrrrua e^nfeJetul a,rn¡oddns E ur ter{t panSre aH 'uonrererul lurf,os ruor3l¡reuud sdo¡a,rap a8en8uel rErF papnpuor eH 's0€6I

Pu¿ s0z6l eqr uI uorun lrr^os eql ur sloor{f,s ur stlnpE pue uarplrql uaa.r\.]ag osle pue ua.rp¡qc Suoure suonf,Brarur pa^rasgo eH '(g/6 I ) flsro8l¡ z'a1 rsr8o¡oqclsd aqr sen' tuarudola ep plr{r Jo rurpnls lBnuenHur rarFouv

'lueuruoJrlua eqt qrrd\ uonf,eralur ¡errslqd g8norqr palnbre J^Er{ uaJp¡ql reql a8pa¡moul ruasarder ol pasn aq um aSen8uel 'pooqplql ul pado¡az'ap eJB lrr{t srualsfs loqrufs 3o Jagunu B Jo euo sezrr a8en8ue¡ 'ra8el¿ JoC 'perel -ndrueru.ro pe lasqo ag um reqt s8ulqr eql pue pllql Jql uea^\taq uonJ€retur sr Surpuersrapun a,rrtruSor Surdo¡a,rap aql 'ruasarda.r laqr srdar aql uo rlnq

-uof ar{t 3o SurpuetsJapun suaJpl¡lo arp uo spuadap (aJoru, ro .ra88rg, se r{Jns suJal ureuaf,Jo esn aqt 'eldurrxa.tog 'a8en8ue¡ arrnbce leqr rvrog aulru -rarap l¡rred ppo,/vl ruaudo¡a,rap artuuSoc suaJplrql r'roq eas ol lsea sl 11 '(rarer'r uo lBoH ol sJaqlo put lurs ol spoJ auros asn?J ('rre '¡e¡tateru 'rg8¡a,,'r'azls rlaql) spoJJo tas eJo salr¡ado¡d qrlq^\ rno Sulrn8g) Surcuara3ul ¡erl8o¡ pue'(aur¡ pazaanbs l¡rq8p e ur saruuad 0I u¿ql snorerunu erour tou aJE aurl 8uo¡ e uJoJ ol rno peards saruuad 0I ier{r Suml,oq) a:u¿.lraddr rrerp ur sa8ueqrSo ssa¡pre8ar sapnuenbSo ó¡¡qrts agr'(araqr ¡ps are rq8rs ruog ueppl{ s8ulqr regr 8ultllou>1) acuaueurad roafqo se s8ulqr q:ns jo 8ur -PuetsrePun a,ulluSoc Jrar{t jo ruaurdo¡alap aqr a3eJr or elqE sE,/$, aH 'a¡doad pue srcalqo glr^. uorreJelur Jrar{l ur puB íe¡d.naqr ur uarplrr{J put s}ueJur pe^rrsgo ra8er¿ ',(¡ntuec qrgz ar{Uo saperap l¡ree aqr uI '(I 16I) raSer¿ ueaf 'tslSolotualsldaTrsSo¡oqcfsd ssrrtg eqt sE \ ruarudo¡arrap azrlr¡u8oc Jreql uo or{r jo srueuodo¡d lsJrlJea ar{rJo auo

rlmg $ a8en8ue¡ suaJplrr{r tBr{r

^\or^

llslotl¡pue

ra8erd

'a8en8ue¡3o uonrsrnbfr Jrar{r pue tuarudo¡arrap ar'nluSoc s,ueJplrqr uea.l*teg drqsuone¡ar esop eqr pazrsrqdua 8uo¡ a,req (gL6D ulqols ueq sE 'paapul 'tuarudo¡a-r'ap e,urruSoc pue a:uarradxe s pIr{J ar{r

r{fns

sJar{f,Jeaser

?ooqpllqr r(1na ut Sututaal a7an&uaT

26

Language learning in early childhood

Cross-cultural research Since the 1970s, researchers have studied childrent language learning environments in a great many different cultural communities. The research has focused not only on the development of language itself, but also on the ways in which the environment provides what children need for language acquisi-

tion. Between 1985 and 1997, Dan Slobin edited five volumes devoted to research on the acquisition of 28 languages, providing examples and analyses

ofchild language and the language-learning environment from communities around the world. One of the most remarkable resources for child language researchers is the Child Language Data Exchange System (CHILDES), where researchers have contributed child language data in dozens of languages in recorded and transcribed forms that are available as electronic files from the CHILDES website (Mac\flhinney2000). One feature of cross-cultural research is the description of child-rearing patterns. Catherine Snow (1995) and others have studied the apparent effects on language acquisition of the ways in which adults talk to and interact with young children. In middle-class North American homes, researchers observed that adults often modify the way they speak when talking to little children. This child-directed speech may be characterized by a slower rate of delivery higher pitch, more varied intonation, shorter, simpler sentence patterns, stress on keywords, frequent repetition, and paraphrase. Furthermore, topics of conversation emphasize the childt immediate environment, picture books, or experiences that the adult knows the child has had. Adults often repeat the content of a childt utterance, but they expand or recast it into a grámmatically correct sentence. For example, when Peter says, 'Dump truck! Dump truck! Fall! Fall!', Lois responds, 'Yes, the dump truck fell down.'

B¿l go bf'

Ha ,he not

Cons;dere¿ 1'1c efr.cE9 of Stt¿t"'

'ffi

LZ

'fem

prldlr

aJoru

E

ul a8en8ue¡ do¡amp 01 uuJID Pa./dollr uollf,EJalul asol{^{ ¡auued IEuorlESraA -uof, B se l¡ruerrodrul arorrl 'lng '¡apour e se lluo lou-Jar{lorq JaPIo sI{ PEq aq :s.ru1f IuoS ruaJeglp se,r,r lualuuoJl^ua :nsnSul¡ s,uualD fe¡ap e8en8ue¡ ¡e8unol s¡u¡f 'a8e srri jo 3o adlr erurs ar{t feldsrp tou PP uuelD reglorg pcldlr e¡oru aSrn8uel fq pace¡dar 'pareaddesp Peq su¡aued graads Fnsnun aqrJo rsoru sqluoru o^\r puB s.leal;noi3o a8e aqr lg 'a,rordur or ue8aq san -lllqe a^lsserdxa srq 'r¡npe ue qll^\ suolssas leuorlesJaluor ue8ag ulf uaq¿¡ slq or atet¡do¡dde szapl aq 'JapJo 'a8e pJo,&\ '¡ensnun Pasn ¡eclteruruer8un .a3en3ue13o stredse r'ro1aq ssa¡dxa or parduane ag qSnoqr¡y IIE ur la^el a3r sqtuoru aulu pue uraf aeJl{l l" luJlussasse a8enSuel IIa,^ se.ü eq lpr{l pJlBf,IpuI

y .a8en8ur¡ uSrs ¡o IEJO Jarpre ul rulq qlr^t parbrunruruof, lua;¿d E r{f,rrr( ur lueuruorrlua lerurou e ur lueudo¡a.tep olrsln8ul sH ur8aq lou plp rulf f_o3 perrr IIa^\ se,l.r aq slcadsa¡ reqlo ur q8noqrp 'snql 'rul[ qrur a8en8uel u8ls asn lou plp srua.red eql IEI{I uI lEnsnun ser'r fllueJ ag1 f¡ruanba5 PaI{3rBr\ aq qllqlr\ 'uolsl^elal q8norgr s¿z'r a8¿n8uel IEro I{1I^\ lf€luof, l¡uo srq puz 'siuared3eapJo plqr SuliEaI{ E s",l\ eH 'urf pa¡¡m laql PII{I Elo ruaudo¡a,rap aSeffiurl eql perpnts (Ig6i) san8ea¡or rer{ puB sqf,ES eullenbref 'Sutssnu sr uorrf,erarur r{f,ns araq^\ seser lq Peteulrunlll sl PIIqI aqr ol spuodsal oq^\ Jol p¡lqc 3uru.rca1-a8en8ue¡ E uaa,l\leg uollJeJalulJo elor agl -nf,olJetu

uE pu¿

uollf,sJelul Jo eJu"uodul eq¡ 'uerplrqr or passarppe graads uI eletu srFP? aruos

teql suonef,glpotu el{l Jo rraJa urat-8uo1 aqr a8pnl or lFrUglP sl }I 'snql .a8en8uq Álunuuoc agl a;mbce fagr puv'luauruoJr^ua rreql ur ruaql ol p3Suruuau sr lEr{l aSenSuq reag laqr r{JIqlA ur suoDBn}rs ur _aJE ueJPlrqs i,{irrrot l¡a,re ul ;ssa¡rgrra,tr¡ .uJJpp{f, Jrerp grr^.r tf,BJa}ur sdno¡8 fruqra puE f,[uouof,aorsos luaJeJrp u¡ s]ua¡ed sfer"r arp ur sDuaJaJIp lErluasqns peruatunf,op a^EI{ sreqro PuB (886I) r{leaH acrrg lalrrq5 'solels Pallun aqr urqlr^{ ua,rg .sre,lr8aref, Jraql sE a^ras oqm s8u¡¡qls Jeplo q¡m l¡r.reru¡.rd r:e -Jelur uJJpllqc Sunol'sJltellos Jtuos uI reqr Pa^Jesqo e^el{ sJaI{IJEJSaJ Jaqro

's¡us e8en8ue¡ pado¡a,raP aJoru e^¿g puE Jeplo arz faqr llun srppe qtr/ú suorlEsJa^uof, ur elEdrf,rl -¡ed or peSrrnotua ro parcadxa lou are leql 'sr¡npr 01 uals{ puE qf,rE^\ or parrad*a are uerpllq) 'ltanos lrnul IEuoIrIP"rl uI lsqr Pa^lasgo (ZeeD o8er3 er{uery .s¡au¡zd IEuoIIESJa^uo¡ al¿udo¡ddz ag or uaJPIIql rlsl{l raPlsuof, (066I) uneJell{f,S ¿auln9 r'r,a¡ ende¿ uI srsqtou IInIE) lEI{l rou Punoi PrP ,a¡druexa roC 'uaJpllqo Sunof ,ftal qrrn' fe¡d ¡tqra,r Jo uolltsra^uof, Iqrutg ui a8e8ua tou op srlnp' ,sa'arf,os eruos uI 'l'SJa^run su?auJ ou fq sl sauoq u€rrreurv ssEIl-elPPItu uI Pe^rasgo qoaads ParserIP-PF{r Jo Pur>t aqr rEI{r ul 3ur¡¡o1( sJal{fJeaseU puno1 e^¿q >lJo \arueg cuolrezllelsos a8rn8uel, ¿

a8anSua'¡ ?oot/?l lqr Qna m Sututaal

28

Language learning in early

ch

ildhood

Jim showed very rapid acquisition of English once he began to interact with an adult on a one-to-one basis. The fact that he had failed to acquire language normally prior to this experience suggests that impersonal sources oflanguage such as television or radio alone are not sufficient. One-to-one inreraction gives children access to language that is adjusted to their level ofcomprehension. tü7hen a child does not understand, the adult may repeat or paraphrase. The response of the adult may also allow children ro find our when their own utterances are understood. Television, for obvious reasons, does not provide such interaction. Even in childrent programmes, where simpler language is used and topics are relevant to younger viewers, no immediate adjustment is made for the needs of an individual child. Once children have acquired some language, however, television can be a source of language and cultural information.

Usage-based learning

As more and more research has documented the ways in which children interact with the environment, developmental and cognitive psychologists find further evidence that language acquisition is 'usage-based'. In this view, language acquisition is possible because ofchildrent general cognitive capacities and the vast number of opportunities they have to make connecdons between the language they hear and what they experience in their environment. Sophisticated electronic recording devices have been used to track and count words and phrases children hear in their daily lives. Deb Roy documented his son's acquisition of words, showing the frequency and the contexts for the occurrence of language. Most remarkable, perhaps, is the demonstration of the power of interaction between the child and the adults and how adults focus on rhe language the child has begun to use (Roy 2009). The usage-based perspective on language acquisition differs from the behaviourist view in that the emphasis is more on the child's ability ro create networks of associations rather than on processes of imitation and habit formation. Referred to by various names, including cognitive linguistics, this view also differs sharply from the innatists' because language acquisition is not seen as requiring a separare 'module of the mind' but rather depends on the child's general learning abilities and the contributions of the environment. As Elena Lieven and MichaelTomasello (2008) put it, 'Children learn language from their language experiences-there is no other way (p.168). According to this view, what children need to know is essentially available to them in the language they are exposed to. Some of the eady research in this frameworkwas done in the context of connectionism and involved computer simulations in which language samples were provided as input to a fairly simple program. The goal was to show that the computer could 'learn' cerrain things if exposed to enough examples. The program was found to be able to sort our the parterns from the input and even generalize beyond what it was actually exposed to. It even made the

6Z

ol uonualtE f,n¿uals,{s eluos saPnlf,ul leql uollf,nJlsul ¡eads tou ftro eruos 'sqluour ZI lg spro \ rs.lg a¡qrauSocar acnpord uarPllqr rsoru eF.tU[

'paapul epl \ sl (leruJou, roj a8uer aW rES

puru ur Burdaal 'l¡¡erurou a8rn8ue¡ Suldo¡a,rap rou $ pII{r rerp ¡ae3 farpy " arr^p€ puolssa3o.rd leas ol pa8e:nocua ag sJar{reat pue stuared reqr l"nuassr $ 1I '>looq srqrJo adors eqr ePlsrno s¡ ruarudolaztap aSrnSue¡ rfeJE serurlettro$

ttrp (uo os pue 'exa¡sfp 'f,usnnr 'srua¡gord frole¡nr¡rrc 'ssauJrep Sulpn¡ru¡¡ sJrlrlrqesrp 3o sadó snorJe aqr Jo uolssnlslp V 'eser arlt rou $ slqt ruoq,,f, roJ uarplrrlf, aruos er? a;aqt 'fr¡ap ro lr¡n:g3tp ruelgluSls tnoqll^\ turur -do¡e,rap aSrn8uq 3o sa8ets agr qSno.rr¡r ssa¡8o.ld uerplll{f, rsoru gSnorp¡y

sfe¡ap pue sreprosrp

atenturl

'aruar¡adxa q8norgr paurcJl l¡enrce are 'p¡ag ¡ensut Jno ur srralqo Suna¡d¡alul pu¿ uo SulsnooS 'e¡duexa ro3 'paruelS JoJ e{E¡ e^,l' r¿qr serrrlrge Fnsr^ aqr 's¡ reql '(aes, ol Sulural Surpn¡rul 'Sururea¡ pnr -da¡¡ad pue a,ruuSor rrr{lo ol ll a¡rdruoc lagl 'p¡nll eql lq paqstdruorrt alqDlJ¿uar ,{¡uo egl rou sl 'a¡rtssa¡dtul eIq¡A 'a8enSut¡ 3o uolrlslnb>t rEaJ

'stsuoer{l paseg-a8esn .rog 'dn rlng ert sruroj a8tn8ue¡ Suorue pue Sulueau pue a8en8url uaa^\¡og siullJo Jagrunu ar¡r se 'l¡enper8 ece¡d saler Sulurer¡ 'sasergd pur spro.,'r ureal ol sauunl¡oddo Jo sputsnoqr lueu or pasodn uerpllql rrr{r rf,EJ eqr $ slsaqlodÁ1 srqr ol a¡ueuodul re¡ncrrred ¡g ar¿

'sssuel qra^ r{f,rr{^|. qu¡'r o8 sgra Ps ¡troduar qllq,& ureel osp far¡1 '(a>¡¡¡ am¡ suouut? snou pur (sa>¡t aq) aunu p-taqunu pue uosrad ¡reru reql suroJ grel eqt qrrn sunouo¡d alelf,osse ol ureal ,{aqr (¡re¡nuls '(Iooq) atnq '¡ull. oB un pue al pua (leq:) asxoqr qtlw oB aun pue q reql urtal laqt 'qrua.rg Sulurea¡ eJB uerPIIr{f,JI oS 'sunou qlra sIuJoJ arr.tDah¿ PuE elf,Iue arer¡do¡dde aqr elE -rf,osse ol uJeal repua8 ¡erpeuurrr8 aA?I{ sunou I{JII{1v\ ur sa8en8ut¡ Sulurea¡ ueJpllql 'a¡druexa JoC 'uraqt qtlzvr Jnf,f,o reqr saruegdJoru lef,neurue.rS qrp spJo,4.l ro 'rueql qtr^{ Jnrf,o ler{r saserqd pue spro,,'r Jeqto aqt qrIA seserqd pw

spror*Sulterf,ossrJo ssaf,ord r osp sl t1 'r0qear leuJarxaJo sluaruela qll^\ sPJo^t f¡uo rou sa lo^ul uolllslnbf,¿ aSen8ue¡ 'lapour peseg-a8esn e u¡

Suner:osse

re¡n8ar

e

Surund

s¿

'palua 'aldutexa JoJ 'qrazr rc¡nBarJI uE uo Sutpua par{f,ns'a1eru ueJplrqt let{l (sJ>lelsru, a IlBaJf,Jo sPuD{ erues

?ooq?llqr Qtaa wEututaal a7unSuaT

30

Language learningin earfi childhood

sound-letter correspondences allows them to unlock the treasure chest of reading. Both groups fall within a normal range. For some children, however, reading presents such great challenges that they need expert help beyond what is available in a typical classroom.

Childhood bilingualism The language development of children who learn multiple languages during

childhood is of enormous importance throughout the world. Indeed, the majority of the worldt children are exposed ro more rhan one language. Some children learn multiple languages from earliest childhood; others acquire additional languages when they go to school. The acquisition and maintenance of more than one language can open doors to many personal, social, and economic opportunities.

Unfortunatel¡ as Jim Cummins (2000) and others have pointed out, children who already know one or more languages and who arrive at their first day of school without an age-appropriate knowledge of the language of the school have often been misdiagnosed as having language delays or disorders. This includes immigrant and minority language children who do not speak the school language at home and children who speak a different variety of the school language. These children's knowledge of a different language or language variety is often incorrectly interpreted as a lack of normal language development and a lack of background knowledge for school subjects. They may be placed in remedial or special education classes because schools are nor equipped to provide an adequate assessment of childrent abillry to use rheir home language or of their general cognitive abilities or their knowledge of school subjects, learned through another language. Researchers have recendy made important progress in providing guidelines that can help educators distinguish between disabiliry and diversiry (Paradis, Genesee, and Crago 20II), but much practical rvork remains to be done so that children can make the most of their cognitive and linguistic abilities. Children who learn more than one language from earliest childhood are referred to as 'simultaneous bilinguals', whereas those who learn another lan'W'e guage later may be called 'sequential bilinguals'. sometimes hear people express the opinion that it is too difficult for children to cope with two languages. They fear that the children will be confused or will not learn either language well. However, there is little support for the myth that learning more than one language in early childhood is a problem for children who have adequate opportunities to use each one. There is a considerable body of research on childrent ability to learn more than one language in their earliest years. Although some studies show minor early delays in one or both languages for simultaneous bilinguals, there is no evidence that learning two

rc,

'(OOOZ

sururun3) uoltf,Eralul fep-or-fep3o a8en8uel

¡eru

-JoJur aqt ueqr arlnbre ot uaJplll{f, Jo3 t¡nr$P eJotu sI esJnof,slP f,IluePm¿ roJ pepaeu a8en8ue¡ aqr reql 'razrerrroq 'paar8e flap¡ru, sI lI 'TBISJa^oJluof, uleruaJ

uonf,urlsrp aqr3o srcadse auJos Pu¿ 'tueqt guru oB ol Pual teql sulaned uon -JEJalur aqr pue e8un8ut¡3o saIlaIJE^ oser{l sezIJe}JPJeI{f, rEI{l $ u fpcexa req,n

re orsrp ol rg8nos a^¿q srer{}o pue (7002) ¡a.r8adda¡r1c5 frryq 'passardxa s uorleruJoJur fer'r aqr ul osle tng sarmbar I{rBa r¿ql lre¡nqecorl3o a8ue; agr u¡ lsnl lou lJo1t\ lE .,*o.1 aSenSur¡,/deu eql qrrrn sa¡88nrls u1t\o JIeI{r 3^3q,{eur leql ePISrno aqr ,ruealsa-j¡as u,/v\o Jrarp ureturpur ot stua¡¿d roj lernrt os¡e^sl s8u¡r

r"

l¡piraisr

-rrr'i¡r-"j ul a8en8ue¡ u^\o Jrar{t Surs¡ .lla1v\ sE l'rorDl tou op lar{r a8en8ue¡ ,r, ,h",r"* urc laqr ue{p etBJogEIa eJou pue Jaqf,rJ aJB ler{} sler'r ut seap¡ " pue aSpaytroDl JIaI{1 ssa¡dxa ol alqB a-re fagr 'uarp¡rqc:laql qll'/r't' lsag ,^t\ou>I a8rn8ut¡ aqt asn ot enulluos sruarrdSl 'a8rnSur¡puooes ar{lJo sJa faqr regr eqtJl anrl l¡¡enadsa q slql 'Peureel Suleg sr a8enSuel -.rrL¡ ot1" ,r" '.rtt"á a8en8utlaruoq aI{Uo e3u¿ueluleru agr-rusqen8u1lq a p p.rorit eqr allq,{\ -lpp" roJ a^rrls 01 sr gceorddz Jsrreg e rrgr srsaSSns ef,uePr^e qf,J¿eseJ aLII 'uaJPIIql Jleqr qlld\ a8en8ue¡ looi{ls ar¡r Suqeads uo P"3}sq 3lB¡luaruof,

p,r" ,-og ie'a8"ná,r{ llUreJ eqr Suureads dors p¡nor¡s far¡r rrrp s1 sruared ot tá*tp*or sJolef,npa ,uonnlos, aqt ,flarrunuoJun 'Sulurea¡ f,IruaPef¿ asodo.ld

rrar{l ul pulqaq ¡¡ej leur

uolllsuerl arp Suunq 'a8en8ue¡ fllwJ laqt 'pouad larp pue 'aSrn8uel looqls aqt pararseu rcl

r.¡t do¡t-p or prt.ttr,to, rou

pooqfllqr ,(paa

ur

arrer¡

Suruttal a8tnSutT

34

Language learning in early childhood and six years old. Compare these to books for young readers, aged six to eight.What does this suggest about the importance of continuing to read

to children after they

have begun

to learn to read at school? Finall¡ look at or I l.What can you

the language used in textbooks for children at age l0

conclude aboutthe challenge faced by English language learners entering school at this age?

3 lf you are or may be teaching a second language

to a group of school-

aged learners with different first language backgrounds, can you think of pedagogical tasks/activities in which children can display and use their L I

knowledge to help them learn the second language?

Suggestions for further reading Berko Gleason,J. and N. Bernstein-Ratner (eds.). 2009. The Deuelopnnent ofLanguage 7th edn. NewYork Allyn and Bacon. Many of the chapters by leading expems in child language introduce readers to the best-known findings of the pasr 50 years of research on childrent language development. In addition, there are chapters based on new research, using the kinds of technology that have only recently become available. Thus, the rich database created by researchers with notepads, tape recorders, and tools such as the 'wug rest' is complemented by studies ofthe neurological bases oflanguage learning and language use.

Paradis,J., E Genesee, and M. B. Crago. 2011. Dual Language Deuelopment and Disorders: A Handbook on Bilingualism and Second Language Learning2ndedn. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes. The authors describe language acquisition by children who learn more than one language simultaneously or sequentiall¡ drawing on research from education, psychologr, and linguistics. They make the research accessible by their writing style, the inclusion of a glossary of terms, and above all by relating the research to profiles of children who are acquiring their languages in a variety of home, school, and community situations. The authors provide insights into both normal and atypical multilingual development.

8.2.2008. Raising a Bilingual Child: A Sup-by-Sap Guidefor NewYork Living Language (Random House). Addressing herself mainly to parents, Barbara Zurer Pearson (2008) reviews research from many studies and shows how children become bilin-

Pearson,

Parents.

gual in many different environments. She also emphasizes the advantages of growing up with a knowledge of more than one language-from the evidence for cognitive fexibiliry to the benefits of cultural knowledge. 'W'ritten in an approachable and humorous style, the text is supported

by Zver Pearson's thorough knowledge of the research literature that is included in the bibliography.

'sosselr a8enSue¡ o¡ o3 ol lt¡unr.roddo ou turneq pu€ luauluoJraua a8entue¡ puo)es e ur Suqlom uortetrnpa petdn"rsrp Jo parlull ql¡an tuer8rur.ur llnpe uE Í.Duno¡ u^ o Jteql ur a8enBue¡ uSraro¡ e Sullpnls luaf,selop€ uE puno.r8le¡d aql uo Jo aJe) lep ur a8en8uel puo)as e Sururea¡ plrr.ltr E aSen8ue¡

lsrg

? Sutureal

pllr{l Sunol

o

r o

e.

:.ra¡¡rp leu sJeuJ€el 3ur,r,ro¡¡o¡ eql Jo suogtpuor Sululea¡ pue sf,ttstJettreJeqf, oqr or{ rnoqs >lurql'sJn))o l¡¡errd,0 uorlrsrnb¡e a8en3ue¡ eq} qlrq^ ur ^ sluauuoJr^ue aql pue sf,tlstJelt€J€qf, rsJauJeel eql qroq,o sruJol ut anJl st

srql'a8en8uel puolas e Surulea¡ pltqt Jeplo ue.lo a8en8uel lsJU e Sur.llnbre p¡rqr 8uno,( E uroJl sle¡l luer.u u! luaJa#rp sr JeuJeel e8enBue¡ puores V

turu.ree¡ etentue¡ puo)as JoJ slxeluo)

oJoldxf

^rtltr)v

'f3o¡ouoqd pue'scrrcruEurd 'rfte¡nqmo,r3o tuaurdola,rep ,sJauJeelJo slf,adse aruos,/v\ar^eJ oslr e/N'a3¿n3 -uEI puof,es eql ur seJntea3 prlSoloqdJou pue ¡rlr¿luls aruosJo uonrsrnbf,E eqr ul saf,uanbes pue sa8ers tE >lool a4N'a8pa¡rv'oul reqr esn ot ól¡qe rraqr pue a8en8uel ariuo a8pall.oq Jreqr rnoq¿ sn ilel uBf, sJorra ter{ \ ssnf,srp pue a>lBru sJeuJBel ]¿ql sJoJJa erpJo eruos eurruExa elN'slxeluoJ asaql ur sJeuJEel Jo sf,rlsrJalf,?r?qf, luaJaJIP eqr sE ¡ar'r se Sulurea¡ a8en8uel puofes puE lsrg roJ slxaluof, rueJeJrp eqt tE SuDIoo¡ lq urSaq arN'a8en8uel rreqrJo rsn pue ^\au a8pa¡mou1 Suldo¡a,rap 1eads eqr Jar{req^\ 8ul.uou1 rou 'algruo3urorun ¡aa3 leur sror -n3olJalur 'a8en8uel arel¡do¡ddeur asn ol s¡¿adde ;a>1eads a8en8ue¡ puofes E eJal{,/v\ uoll¿nrls E uI 'Jolnf,olJalul pa¡zznd e ruo{ lualuluoo a.,lrala.l leu¡ a3ror{f prorrr Suor,tr eqr tnq 'uo pe>lJ"uroJ ag lou l¿u¡ uolter:unuo¡d pue reruuer8 Jo sJorJa 'snq1 les or Surl¡t sr ra>1eads eqr rrr{^\ pu¿tsJepun touu¿r lagr3¡ JoJJa u? 01 lleeJ l¿ru s¡otncolJalur 'sselaque^eN 'tueql qtr^\ uontsJe uof, e a^Er{ ol 8u¡l¡r se.,'t. or{,.rr euoeuros petfaJJof, pue perdnrrarur laqr3l alrodu¡l lagr ¡aag plno^,\ aldoad lsory 'pe>loolra^o l¡ensn a¡e Sulueau r{lr^\ eJeJJatur tou op ter{l sJoJJe (sruooJss¿lo eplstno Surumal aSen8ue¡

Surag a;an

puof,as ur 'l¡.te¡rulS 'a8en8ue¡ s,uJJplrqr.uaqr;o l:e-rnf,f,¿ lerneruruer8 aqr or uer{t Jar{tEJ Suluraru agr or puodseJ ol puet slua;rd '1 ;ardeq3 ur 1v\es e¡a sV

'uonelrunluruof I?eJ ul a8en8ue¡ ar{rJo sasn a¡uar¡adxa ol sanrunl¡oddo jo s.raurea¡ Sulrr.lrdap snql 'luerue8eueu uooJsself, to aur¡dnslp ro3 a8en8ue¡ Jrelp ot gf,rr,ryls uar'a fetu sJar{f,¿at 'sasse¡: a8en8ue¡ u8raro3lueu lsJg ,sluePnts lsou ur pesn sr lr sB a8en8ue¡ eql ol uosrJedruoc ul IEruJoJ u1 's8uluas IErJos

trl{aaruos $ leql a8en8ue¡ rg8ner ueuo aJE sJeuJeal ruooJsselo 'a¡druexa;og 'sadlr as¡nocslp3o a8ue.r rallerus reJ E ol pasodxa eg or puat osp fagr 'a8en8 eqt qtl-&\ loeluoi ur erurl ssa¡ puads l¡uo rou sJeuJeal uooJssEIJ -uEI

^\eu

Sututaal a8an&ur¡ puotag

40

S econd

language learning

Ex.tttc tr€,

l'¿hffl toíl€¿¡

\

Pfsa*

?

-'

This brief discussion places the emphasis on how both the characteristics of learners and the contexts in which they acquire a second language may be different. In the following pages, we will focus more on similarities in how their knowledge of the new language develops over time.

Studying the language of second language learners 'We have seen that childrent knowledge of the grammatical system of their first language is built up in predictable sequences. For example, grammatical morphemes such as the -ing of the present progressive or the -ed of the simple past are not acquired at the same time, but in a sequence. Are there

developmental sequences for second language acquisition? How does the prior knowledge of the first language affect the acquisition of the second (or

third) language? How does instruction affect second language acquisition? Are there differences in the development of learners whose only contact with the new language is in a classroom and those who use the language in daily life? These are some of the questions researchers have sought to answer, and we will address them in this chapter as well as in Chapters 5 and 6.

Knowing more about the development of learner language helps teachers to assess teaching procedures in the light ofwhat they can reasonably expect to accomplish in the classroom. As we will see, some characteristics of learner

l?

llnsar er{r aq or pau¡nssB aJa./r^. sroJJe ((HVJ) srsaqrodfq slsfpue a ps?'r¡ -uoJ aq] or Sulprorry 'a8enSur¡ raSrer aqr So uorsJe lf,arrof,ur ue se f¡durrs ,s096I rlceads (srour¿rl aSen8uel puoras aas ot papuet

aSunSuE "talut

?u?

$t stlaup

"t

oldoad arEI er{r ¡run st1aua a nq sy"t luo )

o,L¿a,s1

'a8en8ur¡ re8rer aqrjo suorsJe rcaSradun sr l¡duns tou .su¡alled pu¿ salnJ 3ur,r¡orra u.,vr,o Jrarp qtv* sruarsls Surdo¡a,rap sE pagursap tseg are uonrsrnbcr a8en8ue¡ puores pur tsr5 qrog .ueql punorc reaq laqr a8rn8ue¡ eqr qrr^\ lf,EJelur regr a8pa¡r'rou¡ rol.rd pue sassef,oJd a¡'llluSo¡ leuJalur uo pesrq aq or radd¿ sacuelues asaql 'prEar{ arreq laqr esoqr e{I l¡rcexa ^\eu lou are rer{l sarueluas arnpord lag¡ 'aclr:erd pue uonelrurr q8norgr fldrurs a8en8ue¡ uJeel lou op sreurcal a8rn8ue¡ puof,as ,srauJeel aSen8ur¡ ]srg eln ,ualr palelosr uE '>lunr{f, E sE pJuftel

lldruls ro a8pa¡nou1 a8en8ue¡ luaJJnf, s JauJEJI e ur f,¡Erualsls Surgraruos3o a¡lleluasa.rdal sr Jnor^Er{aq re¡nrnred E JaqtJr{,/r\ eurruJatap or r¡nlgrp uaryo sr lr 'seJnpaf,o;d asaqt rnoqrr/N'a8en8ue¡3o asn elg¿ Jesgo Jrar{r Surl¡rapun a8pa¡r',rou¡ aqr lnog¿ aroru leeler ol d¡aq leql sarnpasord u8lsap osl¿ aA\ tng 'esn e8en8ur¡ snoau¿tuods (sJeuJ?al a^Jasqo e.&\ .uorlrsrnb:r a8enSue¡ rsrg lpnrs oq,&r asoqt e{l1 'op laqr reqr'r Suluasqo lq uoul sreurtel ter{.r\ os 'spunu (sJauJ¿el pEeJ louuef, sJar{f,rceseJ pue sJar{feal JeJuI

lsnu laqr

'qsn8ugJo pedse rn¿rualsls e 3o a8pa¡mou1 Suldo¡alep Jo af,uapr,ra paplzro;d seq ,palng, sles oqrrt JauJEel egr rnq 'atel¡do¡dde sr 1r eJJr{,/v\ Je>lJ?tr¡ pa- ]f;ed re¡n8ar aql esn PFo,{\ ,rq8nog, sfes ogr* euo eql r¿qr epnlf,uof, louuBf J \ .uonelu -roJur Jer{unJ rnorpr/N ',ta>lJn snq e rq8noq J, sles oqa auo ueqt rerurur.t3 gsrr8ug tnoge aJoru r'rou1 leru ,le>lf,ll snq e palnq 1, sles oq,,'r rauJ¿el e lerp sueeur rBqI 're1reru pa- tsed a¡drurs rr¡n8ar agr llddr ol urcel laqt aro3aq sgJa uoruruoo urEtJaJJo sruJoJ asuJl tsed re¡n8a;.tl eqr u.rea¡ l¡lensn sJauJeel a8en8ue¡ puoJas 'sJeureal a8rn8ue¡ rsJg e{q ,aldurexe ro¿ 'ssarSordjo uolt -Ef,rpur ue aq leru JoJJe ur eseeJf,ur uE 'asuas srqr uI 'pauJ?al rsJg serrr rr r{Jrr{ \ qlv'r sualr lglf,eds agr puolaq uroJ IEJnEruurerS re¡non rcd e az,letaua8 or ól¡q" 8ul8¡aua uE uo paseg aq leru sJorre 1v\eN 'Sulurea¡ >lunr{r Jo uon -EzIJouIauI aloJ uo PaS"g sE,/\\ lEI{] UIJOJ lf,3JJof, E Jo 3sn aql uI aseaJf,Jp e ur per3agal sl ssa¡8o¡d uolllsrnbc¿ a8en8ur¡ saunauos 'surJel asaqt ur paJn -searu ag slezrr¡e touuef, ssa¡8o¡d rng 'atunEwl taSJEt ar{t ser{f,reru a8en8ue¡ rlaqr f¡aso¡r aor.l pue rq8ner uaeg wq ter{ { peurerl e^Eq sruepnts raqrar{ r 'Jlun eqt ¡e a8en8ue¡ JauJEal aslpur sreq3Eat ,asJnof, &runr¡oddo up nol a¡'13 ot sa¡drurs eurruJalap

39

or,üt

laql

'a8en8ue¡ raurre¡ Surslpue asncrrd or

IEuorrrPPE eruos sE ¡arvr se a8en8u¿l JauJ"alJo salduexa3o raglunu E papnlsur a^Br{ e^\ 'qlr¿eseJ a8enSue¡ puof,Js 3o s8ulpug aqt aruos Sunuasard u1

Jo

'a8en8ur¡ puof,as aqr Suurnbce ur q8norgr oB s;au;ea¡ sdats ar{rJo aJntf,rd ¡¡rra,,ro ue a^eq lou saop auo jr Suxa¡drad aunb aq uec aSrn8ue¡ 3u7utaa1 a8an&ur¡ puotag

42

Second language learning

of transfer from learners' first language. Detailed analysis of learners' errors revealed, however, that not all errors made by second language learners can be explained in terms of first language transfer alone. A number of studies many errors can be explained better in terms of learners' developing knowledge of the structure of the target language rather.than an attempt ro"transfer p-att.rn, of their first language (Richards 1974). Furthermore, some of the errors are remarkably similar to those made by young first language learners, for example, the use of a regular -ed pxt tense ending on an

,ho-ihat

irregular verb.

A simplified version of the CAH would predict that, where differences exist, errorsiould be bi-directional, that is, for example, French speakers learning English and English speakers learning French would make errors on parallel iinguistic f.aiur.s. H.l-ut Zobl (1980) observed that this is not always the caie. For example, in simple English sentences, direct objects, whether nouns or pronouns, come aftér the verb ('The dog eats the_ cookie. The dog eats it.'). in French, direct objects that are nouns follow the verb (Le chien mange le biscuit-literall¡ 'The dog eats the cookie'). However, direct object prorri,rr* precede the verb (Le chien le mange-literally-.'The dog it_eats'). lhe CAHiould predicr rhar a narive speaker of English m1s!t make the error of sayi ng: 'Le chien mange le' when learning French, and that a native speaker of frá.h might say'The dog it eats'when learning English' In fact, Éngfish speakers leaining-French aie more likely to make_the predicted .h"n French sp.ak.rs learning English. This may be due to the fact

"rrá, that English rp."k"ri learning French hear many examples of sentences with subjectiverbjobject *ord oÁer (for example , Le chien mange le b.iscuh) and -"k th. incorráct generalization-based on both the word order of their from the second lanq,uage-that all direct objects first languag. "rd.l,rld.nce lhe rr.rb. French-speaking learners of English, on the other hand, .o-. "ñ.r hearing and seeing no evidence that English direct object pronouns precede ',,erbs, áo ,tot t.rrd to use this pattern from their first language'

The finding that many aspecrs of learners' language could not be explained by the CeÉ led a rrnmb.i of researchers to take a different approach to analysing learners' errors. This approach, which developed during the 1970s, and involved detailed descriptions of the É.."á. known as 'error "."lytit' errors second language l.arrrárs made. The goal of this research was to discover what le"rneis ,Jdly ktr.* about the language. As Pit Corder observed in a famous article published in 1967, when learners produce correct sentences, they may simply be repeating something they have already heard; when they produce sentences that differ from the target language, we may the assume thaithese sentences refect the learners' current understanding of rules and parrerns of that language.'We saw this in the example of a learner ;b,ry.d' instead of 'bought.' Error analysis differecl from contraswho says tive aniysis in th"t it did not ,.tlu. to predict errors. Rather, it sought to

e.,

ur oB loql'asJoq € e^Eq sJaqqoJ lta,r3'aruetsrp 3uo¡ e te oes ot sn paltrtulad r¡ reql sere¡8¡o 3ur¡ e qlr^ asn€lJ €]u€S saas oq/v\ urslunou aql u! sJaqqoJ eaJqt a^eq no¡'sasr.rdrns ¡o ra¡red peJ E pup eLunlsof, pal € s€q a¡1 .sasudrns auos elr8 o¡ lt!¡ e u¡ oB asn€lJ plues rourl aues eql ul .rnog € teo asJor.l srH 'req 3tq p seq aLl 'esJor.l stq qlt/v\ uasap eqt ur oB loq,r,ror e fep luuns e 3ur.rn6

tuapnls

looqls fuepuoras'a8en8ue¡ lsJU q)uaJJ : I JeulDel ¿.ra¡¡rp sa3enSuelJalul o/v\l aql op s,(e,r,r t€q^ ul t oc t

¿sJoJJa

ro sPut) aues eqr a>leul sJeuJEal qroq

¿puetsJepun or lrlllq€ rnol qtral lsotn aJaFelul sJoJJo,o spuq l€qM 'JeuJeal qtee lq apeu sJoJJe aqt eutuexf ¿ ¿les or 3urfut sr JeuJeal qlea

leq^ puelsJepun nol ue1

¡

:suollsenb Surrr,ro¡¡o¡ aq¡ Jalv\sue pue slxel ar{r peeu

'ulu aF uoas lou P?q oq/v\ ouoeruos ot tr 8ur¡¡er a.rem Áeqr ¡¡ se'8ultr"lm ul l"lols eql lla¡at ot pe)se a;em laql'u¡g aqt Surarar,r .rar¡y '(epeue) lo pJeo€ ru¡r3 ¡euorre¡r¡)

,Uaqqo¿ Aollo?Jg eq! pappua

ulg uoouef, e Surqursep

'JeuJeal r¡npe 3ur¡eeds-aseurq3 e Jaqto aq¡'tuapn¡s loor,.l)s

-qluarl

e auo'qsr¡3u3 ,o sJau.leel or*r

lq uatltJ^

etentue¡ JouJeel

e"¡a¡,r

eJe^^ sJauJ€el Lltofl

l;epuoras

3ur¿eads

slxel 8ur^ ollo,

esll€uv

aql

rtltrf,v

'a8en8ue¡ ra8rrr arp pue a8en8uelratur rrer{t uee,{\teq seluareglp azluSora,r ot uaqt dlaq p¡noal ltqt >lleqpegJo pupl ar{lro uonf,nrtsul epnlrur tou saop aSen8uel puof,as arp ol a¡nsodxa esorfd sreuJtal JoJ enJt l¡¡elradsa aq leru slgl 'Sur8uego dors or uaas aBrnBuEI sraurEJI p ur saJnteal eruos leql IJBJ ar{r or rgeJ or uop¿z1lssoJ urat aql peurof, osl" relurlas 'ssa-l8o¡d Jer{un3 salelnuns Sulqraruos aroJJg alrq^r E.ro3 neare¡d ¿ r{f,Bal uagt 'ssarSord jo srsrng a Er{ sJauJea-I 'uarc put qloous l¡¡ressecau tou sr uonrslnb¡¿ a3¿n8ue¡ g8norgr qred aq¡'a8enSue¡ puoJas aql tnoqe saseqrodlq Jlegt asr^eJ pue rndur eJour e^reJeJ sJauJeel se 8ur,r¡o,ta f¡rnunuor 'crueulp osp eJE far¡r rnq 'cnerualsls eq or punoJ uaaq a^¿q seSen8ue¡ralu1 'suratsfs a8en8ue¡rarul il¿ ul rnolo ol pue praua8 ag ot ruees lBrF 'saruaqdrour ¡erneuuer8 pue spJo^\ uorrf,unJ Jo uorssnuo (sf,usrJetoeJeqf,

al{r sB qf,ns aruos pue 'aBrnBuEI puof,es aqtJo sf,nsrJalf,eJeqf, au¡os 'sa8en8ue¡ peurea¡ llsnornard lq pacuangur sf,nsrJalf,EJeq3 eruos s"q rr reqr s,toqs aSen8ue¡;arul s(raureal e3o srsf¡euy'a8pa¡z'rou1 aBen8ue¡ puolas Surdo¡a,rap (sJauJeal or aSen8ue¡Jalul arueu aqt arrr8 (ZL6ü ra>1ulag ,{-rre1

'alqerrlpard pue paure^o8-a¡nr sr l¿qt auo-rg8rr u^\o slr ur rualsls e sl a8rn8uel raurea] a8en8url puof,as'a8en8ue¡ p¡r{r alll ,reqr srsagrodlq aql uo paseg s¿,4 slsfpue JoJrE '¿rep a8en8uq puores ssaco¡d sJeuJeal Pu?rsrePun

ol lJoJa ue ur

sroJJe

^\oq Jo sPuq ruaraJlp sglJf,sap puE Ja^of,srp

&urutaa1 a8anSur¡ puocag

44

Second language

learning

the way of Santa Clause, not Santa Clause but his pocket of surprises. After they will go in a city and they go in a saloon. [...] (Unpublished data from P M. Lightbown and B. Barkman)

first language,adult year This Christmas comes soon! Santa Claus ride a one horse open sleigh to sent present for children. on the back of his body has big packet. it have a lot of toys. in the way he meet three robbers.They want to take his big packet. Santa Claus no way and no body help, so only a way give them, then three robbers ride their horse dashing through the town.There have saloon,they go to drink some beer and open the big packent.They plays toys in the Bar.They meet a cow boy in the saloon. Learner 2; Chinese

(Unpublished data provided by M.

J.

Martens)

Perhaps the most striking thing here is that many error types are common to

both learners. Furthermore, both make errors of spelling and punctuation that we might find in the writing ofa young first language speaker ofEnglish. Even though French uses grammatical morphemes to indicate person and number on verbs and Chinese does not, both these learners make errors of subject-verb agreement-both leaving off the third person -s marker and overusing it when the subje ct is plural ('a cowboy go' and 'three robbers in the mountain who sees' by Learner 1 and 'Santa Claus ride' and 'they plays' by Learner 2). Such errors refect learners' understanding ofthe second language system itself rather than an attempt to transfer characteristics of their first language. They are sometimes referred to as 'developmental' errors because they are similar to those made by children acquiring English as their first language. Sometimes these are errors ofovergeneralization, that is, errors caused

by trying to use a rule in a context where it does not belong, for example, the -s ending on the verb in 'they plays'. Sometimes the errors are better described as simplification, where elements of a sentence are left out or where all verbs have the same form regardless of person, number, or tense.

One can also see, especially in Learner 2's text, the influence of classroom experience. An example is the use offormulaic expressions such as'one horse open sleigh' which is taken verbatim from a well-known Christmas song that had been taught and sung in his English as a Second Language (ESL) class. The vivid'dashing through the town' probably comes from the same source, with the substitution of 'town' for'snow'. For those who are familiar with the English spoken by native speakers of French, some of the errors (for example, preposition choice 'in the same time') made by the first learner will be seen as probably based on French. Similarl¡ those familiar with the English of Chinese speakers may recognize some word order patterns (for example, 'on the back of his body has big packet') as based on Chinese patterns. These may be called transfer or

ct?

uu¿uauard paüuBl/t{ pu" (uesq¿lD pler"H 'lesrery ua8.rn[ 'e¡duexa rog 'ruooJsselo eqr aprstno sel'r tueruuo¡l,rua Suru¡¿a¡,fteulrd esoq,e\ sJeuJ"elJo sarpnls ruo5 eru¿J tsrg su;arred leruaudola ap eseql JoJ a3uepr^E 'spunorS -ryeq aBenBuEI tuereglp ruoU sraurea¡ Suorue rtllruls rre leqr l8o¡ogdrou pue xeruls jo ruaudo¡aztep eqr ur suraued punoS a,req laql 'sernteal Jer{ro sE IIe,&\ sE 'esaql pauru¿xe os[B e Er{ uortrsrnb¡e a8en8uel pumes ur sJer{JJeasa¡ 'suonsenb pue 'uone8au 'sauaqdJou l¿f,neruurr8 3o uolllsmbce a8en8 -uEI rsJg qsÉug ro3 saouanbes ¡truaurdola ap aruos .rr\ES a/r\ 1 .rardeq3 u1 'spunorSryeq a8en8ue¡ rsJU tuaJaJlp uroü sreuJea¡ Suorue rrllrurs arE lueru 'afuangur uE e^Eq saop a8en8ue¡ sa8ets ¡etuarudo¡a,rap aser{tJo slcadse

lsrg s JeuJBe¡ arir gSnogr¡e 'l¡¡eulg 'stxatuoo ¡e ur lpcarrof, sruroJ asaqr Sulsn lr¡ncgp a^Er{ sJauJeal palue^pe ua^e tng '(,aqt, ro e,) se¡rnre eJoru Jo auo ser{ aJualuJs qsrÉug,üa.,ta l¡pnrrn'a¡duexa ro{ 'tsJU paureal sfmr¡e lou are luanba.r3 lsoru aJE tBr{t a8rn8ue¡ er{lJo saJntEeJ eqr fo^oe.ro¡¡ 'aBenBuEI atues aqrJo uonrsrnbr¿ a8en8uel rsr5 ur pa^Jesqo esoql ot relrurs osle pue spunor8 ->1ceq aBtnBuEI ]uareglp ruo{ srrurea¡ 3o a8en8u¿lralur Suldo¡arr,ap eqr ur r¿lrruls ere leql sacuanbas ¡eruaudo¡a,r.ep pug er\ r?qt elge>lJttuar arour sr tr 'srgr3o rg8r¡ u1 'sruroJ pro \ pue saf,ueluas 8un¿a¡r ro3 su;eued rueragrp ser{ rerp a8rn8u"l Jarpou¿ rrrou>l lpearle sJeureal a8en8ue¡ puof,es 'aJoruragunJ 'reqro qf,ea ruo{ rueJeglp os¡e rnq 'o aweqdtow ¡otnowwot7 eson&uo¡ puozasJo Atoutwns (ZgOt) quaqsor) ¡'¿ atn8¡1

q

arttsSassod

s- .re¡nBurs

uosrad

prqt

pa- rsed ;e¡n8e.t

tsed re¡n8arrt

alf,rtJE (,3uro8 s! aH, ur s€ arussarSo-rd) fuet¡txne

(,eq or,) e¡ndor ¡e.rn¡d

(a,rrssa.r3o.rd) 8ur-

&u1utoal a8unSuq puotag

48

Second language learning

to question the adequacy ofobligatory contexr analyses as the sole basis for understanding developmental sequences. Teresa Pica (1983) argued that accuraq/ scores should take account ofoveruse and incorrect uses to determine a score for targetJike use rather than refect only use in obligatory contexts. The morpheme acquisition literature raises other issues, not least of them the question of why there should be an order of acquisition for these language features. some of the similarities observed in different studies r..^.d1o 6. due to the use ofparticular tasks for collecting the data, and researchers found that different tasks tended to yield different resuks. Nevertheless, a number of studies have revealed similarities that cannot be explained by the data collection procedures alone. As with first language acquiiition, researchers have not found a single simple explanation for the order. Jennifer Goldschneider and Robert DeKeyser (2001) reviewed this research and identified a number ofvariables that contribute to the order. Salience (how easy it is to notice the

morpheme), linguistic complexiry (for example, how many elemenrs you have to keep track of), semantic transparency (how clear the meaning is), similarity to a first language form, and frequenry in the input all r..- to pl"y a role.

Negation The acquisition of negative sentences by second language learners follows a path that looks nearly identical to the srages we saw in Chapter 1 for first language acquisition. However, second language learners from different first language backgrounds behave somewhat differentlywithin those stages. This was illustrated in John Schumann's (1979) research with Spanish speakers learning English and Henning \l'odet (1978) work on German speakers learning English. Stage

I

(usually'no'or'not') is typicallyplaced before the verb or the element being negated. Often, ir occurs as the first word in the sen-

The negative element

tence because the subject is not there.

No bicycle. I no like it. Not my friend.

'No' is preferred by most learners in this early stage, perhaps because it is the negative form that is easiest to hear and recognize in the speech they are exposed to. Italian- and Spanish-speaking learners may prefer 'no' because ir corresponds to the negative form in Italian and Spanish (No tienen muchos librol. They may conrinue to use Stage 1 negation longer than other learners because of the similariry to a pattern from their first language. Even at more advanced stages, they may also use Stage 1 negatives in longer sentences or

6,

'srueurge5 a)uatues Jo (eEInruJoJ 'sprorrl alSqs

I

a&tts

'af,uengur a8en8ue¡ lsJU ol elqetngunB aJB teql saf,ueragrp euros aJe aJaql 'ulr8¿ puv'uorrrsrnbrr a8enSuel rsJg ur pelJasqo euo aqt ol JEIrur_B st aruanbas IIEJa^o aql 'uoneSau JoJ 1v\Bs e.^a sV'3urp¡og se.ur (regc;easal Jrp¡ rafeld Jar{to aql a¡nrcld qlryx\ tno pu5 01 rapro ul suoltsanb >lse ol pEq laqr qorqm ul aue8 e Surle¡d ere^\ oq.&\ sraleads qluarg tuoü aruof, (q r3"rS ur esoqt rdacxa) sa¡drurxe eql se8erg ur u^\oqs sr aruanb¡s ^\oleq 9-1 erp Jo uorsrel patdepe uy 'spunorS>1ceq aBenBuEI tsrg 3o Áaue.r. E ruo{ gsrtSuE 3o sJauJrel lg suolrsenb 3o uolrlslnbre er{t ul acuenbas E peqrrlsep

(886I) lalpur.rg JoaD pue 'uorsuqof ulocp¡zr¡

,uueruauerd paüuel,{

suopsenb 'aJer{l lua,& r,uPrP I 'qre^ aqt pue lrer¡xne erp qtoq uo Jagrunu pue 'uosrad 'osuel >lJeru ol enunuoJ sJeuJeal euros 'JaAa-1r\oH

raddns a^¿q t,upp

a¿N

lro^\

tusaop rI

'a8en8uel ra8rer aqr3o esoqr el¡ rsnf aq or ¡eadd¿ sacualuas a3¿n3 -uelJalur lsoru pue'raqurnu pue'uos;ad 'asuat JoJ pelJeur sr ,op, 'a8els srqr tr¡

, (asna¡¡ qryu iqrxu uaruuoq azg) 'aruoq [or] rou auor

aSqS

lagl

:sE qf,ns saluelues aonpord pue a,rne8au-gJe^ ol u¡aued a¡tne8au-l¡ellxne er{t ezqeraua8 leru g;e,r eqr JaUE a¡.ne8au aqr sarr¡d ler{l aJnlf,nJls E ser{ a8enSuel tsJg asorfr\ 'sraleads uEruJeD 'e8ers slgt ry

'arrr a>lll r,uoP aqs

'lddei¡ lou

sE^\

aH

'araqr oB lou uEJ noÁ 'pasl¡eue f¡ry rou ilns sr ruJoJ .lJop, aqr 'a8ets srqr rE rng 'uBf , Pu¿ '.sI, lrrl¡xne JelJe luaruale a¡.rl¿8au aqr aceld or ulSaq sJauJEa'J

((eJ¿, e>lll sgra,r

g aSatg '8uls uec tJop I '11a>lll l,uoP aH

.(Plnoqs,

PUE ,uEf,,

elll

sltpour eJoJaq pesn eq ua,ra l¿ru lr pue Jsual Jo fequrnu 'uos¡ed JoJ pa>lJeru lou sI (luop, 'Ja^a.1t\oH ',luop, qll,lr\ Jl¿uJJlp leur ,lou, pue ,ou, 'e8els slqr 1V 7 aSatg 'a8ets pluatudo¡a,l,ap rr¡nrlued

a8en8ue¡ tsJg s(JauJEa¡ e or

¿ qSnorqr ssa¡8o¡d s rJuJEel

p urrrop rttols

lrrrepurs 'sng1 'a¡nssa¡d Japun are lagr

leur

ueqrrr

8u1utual a8an&ual puotag

50

Second language

learning

Dog?

Four children?

\7hatt Stage

that?

2

Declarative word order, no inversion, no fronting. It's a monster in the right corner? The boys throw the shoes?

Declarative order with rising intonation is common in yes/no questions in informal spoken French. French speakers may hypothesize that in English, as in French, inversion is optional. Stage

3

Frontin g: da - f r o nting,

w h -f r o

ntingwitho ut inversion, other fronting.

Do you have a shoes on your picture?

\lhere the children

are playing?

Does in this picture there is four astronauts? Is the picture has two planets on top? French has an invariant form est-ce que (literally 'is it that') that can be placed before a declarative sentence to make a question. For example, Jean aime le cinémabecomes Est-ce queJean aime le cinéma? ('is it that)John likes movies?' French speakers may think that'do' or'does' is such an invariant form and continue to produce Stage 3 questions for some time. Stage

4

Inyersion in wh- + copula; yes/n questions with other auxiliaries.

\(here

is the sun?

Is there a fish in the water?

At

Stage 4, German speakers may infer that if English uses subject-auxiliary inversion, it may also permit inversion with full verbs, as German does, leading them to produce questions such as 'Like you baseball?' (Magst du basebalh)

Stage

5

Inversion in wh- questions with both an auxiliary and

a main verb.

How do you say'proche'? \,lhat's the boy doing? French-speaking learners may have difficulry using Stage 5 questions in which the subject is a noun rather than a pronoun. They may say (and accept as grammatical) 'Vhy do you like chocolate?' but not "ühy do children like chocolate?' In this, they are drawing on French, where it is often

IE

9SrE(.t

9SrEZt

¿lueserd lq8noq laqr s¡ ¿ ¿s8urqr er.uos 8ur,(nq

laqr a.ry 9 z

JeuJsrl

¿3urop aqs

¿3uqu¡qr eq sr leq¡¡ t sl €

9SrEZt 9SVEZt

S

9SrEZt

s! l?q/y\'op aqs seop

leq/v\'nol op reqm'¡.rr8 aql

¿preoq ete)s srq rno Suqel aq

9Sr€.Zt 9Sr€.Zt

¿r.uooJ srrl ruooJ ¿Surles aq sr

leq^

pue 3uro3 eq st

aql sl z

eraqM

I

I JauJ"e'l

etelg ('ur8aq

nol a.ro¡aq suollsanb

srJauJeal

ql€a lo

¡¡e

pea¡ :rurp)

'uorlsenb qrra

ot spuodsarol Naq leqt luaurdola^ap uoBsenb a8en8ue¡ puof,as ¡o

aSers arp

elf,Jrf,'suoDsanb .ro¡ e¡uenbes ¡etuarudo¡arrap eqt lnoqe uoD€ur.ro¡ur aql Surs¡

suollsenb.sJouJeelesÍ|euv Att^ttfv 'sJoJJA Ja,/r\aJ

a:npord sJauJrel ter{l u¿eru sler'r.¡e lou saop e8ers raqSlq e ot ssarSord rerp aroN 'seq JolnrolJalur JrJqt euo aql ruory ruaJegrp sr aas u?f, laqr arnrcrd aqr r'toq rno >lrom laqr lltun suonsenb 1se or a,rrq faqr pur sa;nud lrf,ltuepr rou rnq Jelrruls e^Er{ sJauJeJ¡ '1ser srgr uI lstl .saf,uaJaglp arp tods, e ur raleads elnru E r{rr^\ Surlr¿.ralul eJe r orf$ a8enSue¡ puoJas e se sJeuJEI qsr¡8ug Jo asauedef r¡np" aarql ruo5 eruo3 sa¡duexa )se\L'Z'Z elqeJ ul eqt papr,r "r"p -ord aqs pue 'sarpnls aser{rJo raqunu e euop e^Er{ san8eallor raq pue lalce¡,r¡ uosr[V'9 rardeg3 ur pessnf,srp aq illr\\ q]lr{ \Jo eulos 'serpnlsJo regunu E JoJ srsBg ar{l ueeq s¿q suor}sanb ro3 acuanbas ¡eruaudola^ap s.uupueuard ¿lepor sr etBp er{t rer{ r aru ilet nof ue3 :uorlsanb pappaqua nol r,uer lq¿6 :uollsanb a,rne8au rysl 'reueg s r1 :3rr uonsanb ¿oB

¿rl

'suollsanb xa¡druo3

9 a8atg sal ruaruxp

'(¿aptoqt a1 vuatua nnbmo¿*) rralqns unou E rlll1y\ uoISJa uI asn ol Ff,n¿IUuB.lSun

&u1utaal a7an&ury puotag

52

Second language learruing

8 ls they're ret¡rement peoplel 9 ls this perfume or ... I don't know. l0 And it is necktie? Learner

I Are there any shuttle? Space shuttle? l2 lnside, is there any girl? 3

l4 l5

You

123456

t23456

3

I

|

t23456

dont

see?

What are, what the people wearing? And they are carrying pink boxl

1234s6 123456

123456 t23456 123456

Answer key Learner l: Questions 1,4, and 5 are

Stage 5 questions. Question 5 is interesting because it shows the speaker self-correcting, suggesting that Stage 5 is still a level that reguires some greater effort. Questions 2 and are Stage 4 questions.

3

Learner 2: Questions 6 and 9 could be Stage 4 questions. However, the fact that questions 7 and 8 are Stage 3 questions suggests that this speaker has not actually progressed from'fronting' to'inversion', particularly since

question l0 is a Stage 2 question. Learner 3: Questions I I and 12 are Stage 4 questions. Questions l3 and 15 are Stage 2 questions. Question 14 shows the speaker apparently on the verge of a Stage 5 question, then retreating to a Stage 3 question. Photocopiable @ Oxford University Press

Toble 2.2 Questions by Joponese-speoking leorners of English

Possessive determiners

A developmental sequence for the English possessive forms 'his' and'her' has been observed in the interlanguage of French- and Spanish-speaking learners. In English, the choice of 'his' or 'her' (or 'its') is determined by the natural gender of the possessor. In French and Spanish (and many other languages), the correct form of the possessive determiner matches the grammatical gender of the object or person that is possessed. This can be illustrated with the following translation equivalents for French and English: Sa mére = his

mother or her mother

Son chien = his dog or her dog Ses

enfants = his children or her children

€g

'a8ue¡eqc aqr ot sppB rer{unJ unou l.la,ra puE r{lBe Jo rapua8 ¡eclreuuer8 eqt ureal or peau 3r{I 'JauluJalaP a Issassod arp3o rapua8 aqr Surulru;alapJo le,l¡. ¡"rau E uJEJI osF tsnu faql ,s.rauruuelep e^rssessod Sursoogr JoJ srsEq aqr se .rapua8 ¡e: -neuue¡8 asn ler{r sa8en8uq Jerpo lo ,rlruerC urea¡ s.ra>leads qsr¡Bug uaq¿N srq uo

lsBq srq unq aq PUE rePlnoqs ¡rB sq e>lel pep aqr puv :agraSor fe¡d pep req r{rr^\ 1.rr8 a¡ru aq1 'srred

-pnpur

lpoq pue rapua8 ¡e,rnreu 8ur e enlJe l¡euy sJeu¡BJl

slxetuof, IIE ur (Jeq, pue ,srr{, Jo asn aaU-JoJJa

'g a8erg s¡er (ggg¿) errq4r ler{ \ ur .a8els acuaS¡arua-tsod eqtJo pue eqt

l3eq

srq uo ,reUE puB fappoqs srq uo ¡rl3 e¡ur1.rar1tnd pep pue rer{leJ srr{ >lool aqg 'a¡oórq rar{ uo 11a3 ¡rr8

dn

s?q pessessod rcalqo aql uer{,4

lou rng

(Jar{, puE ,slr{,

ry

aql aq¡

:apua8 lernleu Jo asn palEnuareJl(I

a Jua8t a

uür

-4 s o¿ :

E a&a,lg

(peer{ 'asl¡d.rns sr JarpeJ srr{ pue srq uo 'purq sq uo dn-a1eu aqr rnd eqs .lnJnneeq3¡assrq 8ur1eu aql 1.rr8 'qslug er{s ueqr PUE .13of, pue ,loq a¡ru1 .raq Sulsserp sr rer{lotu eql

rag'lued rer{ 'loJq I, sE r{f,ns seJuJtuas ur asuat rsed lreru or f¡a11 eroul are sraureel rer{r punoJ e Eq srerpo pue (0002) 3r1re¡1-r,rop.reg uoalrpqt

'sreal uaarSg ef,urs aJer{ pe^rr ser{ eqs 'qsg 8lq E per{f,I"r rarsrs l¡lr¡ '(rsed alduls aqr u"qr raqrer rra3.rad tuasa¡d aqr 'a¡drurn ro3) ruroS asual lsed 8uo¡rll, er{} Jo asn aqr ;o Sulpua pa- rc1n8u aqr azrlere -ua3¡arro &ru s¡au;eal 'sqJal re¡n8ar uo asual rsed Suqreu ur8aq laqr ragy 'qsruedg a>1ods a¿N 'Aep Ánt'a Iooqls ot tua \ alN d¡qe¡¡er

pasn sr rstd re¡n8ar aql aJoJag pasn ag

leu

sq;a,r re¡nBaJJIJo suJoJ esuat tsed

'dors rrro¡1

'aun 3uo¡ 8ur¡ro,la. ey1¡ 'Suluea¡u

ter{r JoJ sasn a8en8ue¡ ra8;er eql rBI{t euo eql ag tou leu¡ u q8nogr¡e 'tsed gJa aqr 8ur¡mu auagd;ou ¡ecneruruer8 B r{JEltE ol }JE}s s;au;ea¡ tarr¡ JoJ

'lueJnelseJ ur 'atuof, uos lJoA\ eH 'PJEr{

ool

>lJo,/l\

a/N'rueN

l¡¡

rel^

'rsed agr ur paJJnJf,o luala al{l rBI{t 1üor{s

or ere¡d Jo erun B uonuaur Jo paJJnf,f,o laqr golq.tr uI JtpJo aIF uI slua^¡

ol

JaJeJ

l¡duls feu

a8en8uel petlrull qrl^\ sreureel leads clge.ry'a¡dtuexa ro{ 'a>lBtu srauJ¿el sJoJJe ar{r ur uJas sr aluangul a8en8ue¡ rsJU 'pJItII 'parue PE f¡rlej sl a8en8 -uBIJeluI JIaIF ual{,l\ uela sasnBIJ eArlEIaJ Sutsn plo,Le leru lagr '(sagrporu u &uru"raa1 a8anSual

puotag

56

Second language learning

First language can have an influence here too. Laura Collins (2002) investigated the different English verb forms used by French speakers. The past tense that is most commonly used in spoken French and that is usually a translation of a simple past form in English is a form that resembles the present perfect in English. Thus, the equivalent of 'Yesterday he ate an apple' is Hier il a mangé une pomme-literall¡ 'Yesterday he has eaten an apple'. Teachers often comment on French speakers' tendency to overuse the present perfect. In Collins' stud¡ learners completed passages by filling in blanks with the appropriate form of a verb. As expected, in places where English speakers would use the simple past, French speakers did sometimes use the perfect (either present perfect or past perfect) forms. Furthermore, they used them more frequently than a comparison group of Japanese speakers. However, the French speakers were more likely to use perfect forms for achievement and accomplishmentverbs than for the states and activities. Collins observes, 'The [first language] infuence does not appear to override the effect of lexical aspect; rather it occurs within iC (p. 85).

Movement through developmental sequences \7e have seen in this section that, as in first language acquisition, there

are

systematic and predictable developmental sequences in second language acquisition. However, it is important to emphasize that developmental stages are not like closed rooms. Learners do not leave one behind when they enter another. In examining a language sample from an individual learner, one should not expect to find behaviours from only one stage. On the contrary, at a given point in time, learners may use sentences rypical of several different stages. It is perhaps better to think of a stage as being characterized by the emergence and increasing frequency of new forms rather than by the complete disappearance of earlier ones. Even when a more advanced stage comes to dominate in a learnert speech, conditions ofstress or complexity in a communicative interaction can cause the learner to slip back to an earlier stage. as we have already noted, progress to a higher stage does not mean fewer errors. For example, a learner may produce correct quesalways tions at Stage 1 or Stage 3, but those correct forms are not necessarilybased on

In addition,

underlying knowledge of subject-verb inversion. That is, correct questions at Stage I are formulaic chunks, not sentences that have been constructed from the words that make them up. At Stage 2, learners have advanced, in the sense that they are forming original questions, but the word order of those questions is not grammatical in the target language. At Stage 3, questions are formed by placing a question form (most often a uh- word or a form of the verb 'do') at the beginning of a sentence with declarative word order. This may result in questions such as 'Do you want to go?' that conform to English patterns. However, when the learner asks a question such as'Do you can help

LS

'1(ou>I

fpear¡r

e.&\

ttr{a

ou s?r{ JoreFr[E3 uo e1r\ ?deu 8uI¡rauos 8ulu.rea1 uI .'uollng lreqPag eloJ al{r rE >lool e1( uer{^\ slql ol uJnlal IIId\ alN'sJorrs aluss PUB uonrnJlsurJo eqr e>leru sJer{lo reaq leru faqr 'roe3 uI 'Pue Sulpuelslapunsllu asnec or,(1a1¡¡ lou eJE srorra u^\o rIeI{I 'punorSlcrq a8en8ue¡ lsrg arues aql uro{ srel{ro qtl,l\ ttrErelul sreurcol uaqm Sur8ualler{l eroru uala aq &u slql 'pardn;srp ]ou sr uonef,runruruoo pue fq8u ¡e fpca3rad sPunos rueprrtnba uolte¡sueJl sll uaqrrr l¡ercadsa 'tndul eql uI luesaJd lou sl 8u¡qlauos lBqt af,Ilou ol IFISIP sr lr'rno slu¡od erlqr6 ryOV^S tdar¡e qsr¡8ug3o srau#el Suqeads-qcuarg pus ,lprrrrrurue¡8 s¿ OAVS rdar¡¿ ot enurluo3 r{tuarC Jo sJeuJEaI Suqeads -gsr¡8uE 'aSrn8uq rsJg rIaI{} uI euo or JEIItuls st rr ¡ a8en8ue¡ ra8rel eqr uI Jnf,f,o rou seop reqr u¡arr¿d E Jo PIr Sunra8 lr¡ncgP a,reg sdnor8 qroq lnq 'OVAS ppt ol I{ruerC Jo sreurtal Suueads-qsr¡8ug ro3 put a.rtouadar rlaql ol OAVS ppr or risl¡8uE3o sraureal Suqeads-qcuarJ roJ fsea fpreS sruaas 1I

qq\u1 puD q)uelJ u Tuawan¡d qle^Pv yZ etqD! ssar¿ &rs.re,rtu¡

'¡errleuuert tou

sr atruatuas

prolxg O a¡qerdororoq¿

aqr leql sueau (*) ¡slrolse aql:aroN

'?q1nP lua nosuoqeuDw '€al ua]lo $lulJP rfue¡*

ovs 'gi'/¡ nP

log rua nos euDw* '€el s)ullP uaryo rfue¡

ovs ?ue nos ?ql nP loq euow

'uel¡o ear s¡ur"rp

l-re¡

vo^s '?Ln np l¡oq euory ?uaano5 'eat s¡ulJP rfue¡'uaqg

OASV

qre^pv=

[

]eefq6 = Q QJa¡\= ¡ ¡rafqnS = 5

Sututaa1 a8an&ual puotag

60

Second knguage

learning

So far this chapter has focused on the acquisition of morphology andsynrax in the second language . \7e now turn to the learning ofsome other important

components of communicative competence: vocabular¡ pragmatics, and pronunciation.

Vocabul^ry In 1980, Paul Meara characterized vocabulary learning as a'neglected aspect of language learning'. Researchers in the 1970s and early 1980s were drawn to syntax and morphology because of the way error patrerns and developmental sequences of these features might reveal somerhing about universals in languages and language acquisition. How different things are now!Just as Meara was commenting on the state of neglect, an explosion of research on vocabulary learning was beginning, and the acquisition of vocabulary has become one of the most active areas in second language acquisition research. For most people, the importance of vocabulary seems very clear. As

it

has

often been remarked, we can communicate by usingwords that are not placed in the proper order, pronounced perfectly, ot -"t[.d with the proper grammatical morphemes, but communication often breaks down if we do not use the correct word. Although circumlocution and gestures can sometimes compensate, the importance ofvocabulary can hardly be overestimated.

Do You tneAr fRENCtt ?

l;1

a 0,0,

I9

lII

{ool rer{l sue}I euos sePnlf,ul

osle lsII qf,eg 'PJo-ü

eqr r'rou>I laqr rou Jo Jeqlal{^\ or Sutprorre (ou, JO ,sal, ¡raqc ol Palf,nJtsln aJE sJaureel pur'stsl¡ PJo lJo turoJ aqr a1"1 slsal esal{r3o auos'rf,EJ slq¡Jo a8etue,rpr e>ler teqt stsar pado¡a^eP a Eq (E002) san8rc¡¡oc sq Pue ErEeI'r( 'pJo^\ E sI rI l¿qt azluSo¡a¡ ot l¡duls sI PJo^\ E Sulrvroul ut dals rsJg eL{L InEd

',acr¡druocce, ro'.pa8e¡e, 'fuotullsal, sE qf,ns sP¡o.s, lnoqt elf,IlJE rad¿ds¡v'au e

l¿ru asec tJnof, ? 3o aSpa¡mou1 aqr rnoqlvlr rsol ag 'peeJ

PuE JeeI{ a,vt s8urql lueruio Sutuearu ;o Suluearu aqr 'a¡duexe JoC ol IErf,nJ3 aJE spJo^\ ruanbarj ssel 'stxal lef,Iul{f,al-uou lsoluJo tuar ¡ad 06-08 s" r{Jnru se dn aleru qslSuE uI sP.Io^\ ruanbari lsolu Puesnoql eaJl{l Jo o^u aqr q8noqr¡y'uotusmbre3o sa8ets lsour tE sJeur?el a8en8ue¡ Puof,as roJ esEJ aJEJ E-spJo^\ el{rjo tuar ¡ad 16 uetll eJoru,4 ou>l ol sPaau auo 'lleuotlrtp e llnsuof, ot sdots ruanbarj lnoqllm lxel e PurtsJePun ol JePJo uI 'íl"ql Pe^\oqs uoneN InEd pur nH EIITf,TEI J 'lxeluo3 ruog Passen8 l¡rsea lou aru

atp

(OOOZ)

tegt s8uruearu or 8ut;ta3al 'rlnfSIIP eJou eq l¿ru ot pasodxa a-re laqr sPJo^r er{} 'srlnpe ro uerpllql raPlo are laqr 31 'a8en8ur¡ rsr5 rlal{r Jo sPro.4 PuBs -nor{l o^\¡ Jo Juo lsrg slil ureal uerPIILI3 tllltl,/!\ uI esoql se ¡nid¡ag sB aq lou

feu fre¡ngero^ 1r\eu Jalunofua sJeuJeal e8rn8ue¡ Puosas qllqrit ul slxaluoJ aqr 'osppeureel aq or a8en8uÉl al{lJo sa¡durs railEus re3 or pasodxa eg or l¡a>1r¡ a.re faqr '8urqr auo JoC 'sreureel a8en8ue¡ Puof,es roJ ruaraJlP alrnb st ,{ie¡nqeco.r. a8rr¡ e 8ul:rnboe 3o >ls¿r aql 'uo5a alqr^rasgo aprl qrrr'r a8en8 -uEI rsrg Jlaqt uI sPro^\Jo sPursnoqr urcel ueJPIIqJ 'I rardEI{J uI lvres e¡a ry 'raurEal a8en8ue¡ puores E JoJ rueuqs¡¡duocce ruecgluS¡s e sl fre¡nqeco,r rrseg E 8ul¡lnbr¿ 'os ueAE 'sJatf,errr{f, 000'I fpear¡e lagr sprold lueru .uoq uJrel ol pasudrns ag fru PIro,&\ agl rnog8noJgl sluaPnls 'sa8en8ue¡ Jel{to tuo{ spro^\ pardepe PuE (Pe,4aorrog, JAEI{ sa8en8ur¡ lueur 'suorleorunluuro) Jo uoIlEZIIBuoItEuJaluI Sulseanul qrt¿¡ drcpqero,r ruroul lpear¡e IeuolteuJerur uB Jo u¿d art laqt asneraq 'Z rsl'I uI sPJo^' (PuEq rar{ro eqr uO rg8ru qsr¡8uE palpnrs raleu aler{ orl,4 stuaPnts eutos 'pegsrlqersa

ila,ry\

sI

Suru¿au

slr puc pJol( E uee.t\rag IuII arp eJoJeq sarull luetu sn{r oP rsnru larp 'a1nr E se 'pue '3utu¿atu Jleqt I"eAeJ lEql slxeluof, uI sPJolt\ el{r JEaq Jo aos lsnu¡ leqr 'uagr uJeal ol aJE stuapnlsSl '8ulurcru Jlaql ol an¡o e sa,u8 reqr se^las -ueqr spJo,/$. aqlJo uollelfunuord agr.ro uJoJ uetllJl'r agr ul Surgrou sI aJel{r Sututaal a3an3ua7 puotag

64

Second knguage learning is an important potential source of vocabulary developmenr for second language learners as it is for first language learners. However, there are some

problems with the norion that vocabulary growth through reading requires little effort. As noted above, it is difficult to infer the meaning of a newword from reading unless one already knows 95 per cent or more of the other words, and learners usually need to have many meaningful encounters wirh a word before they recognize it in new conrexts or produce it in their own speaking and writing. As we saw in Chapter 1, Dee Gardner's (2004) research demonstrates that certain types of words are rare in narratives. Thus, students who read mainly fiction may have little chance of learning words that are essential for their academic pursuits. Conversel¡ reading mainly science texts will not provide many opportunities to learn the vocabulary of social

interaction. Research on vocabularylearning through readingwithout focused

instruction

confirms that some vocabulary can be learned without explicit instruction (see Chapter 6, Study 17). On the other hand, Jan Hulstijn and Batia Laufer (2001) and others provide evidence that vocabulary development is more successful when learners are fully engaged in activities that require them to attend carefully to the new words and even to use them in productive tasks. Izabella Kojic-Sabo and Patsy Lightbown (1999) found that effort and the use of good learning strategies, such as keeping a notebook, looking words up in a dictionar¡ and reyiewing what has been learned were associated with better vocabulary development. Cheryl Boyd Zimmerman (2009) provides many practical suggestions for teaching vocabulary and also for helping learners to continue learning outside the classroom. Even with instruction and good strategies, the task of acquiring an adequate -What does it mean to 'know' a word:

vocabulary is daunting.

. . . . o

. .

Grasp the general meaning in a familiar context? Provide a definition or a translation equivalent? Provide appropriate word associations? Identify its component parts or etymology? lJse the word to complete a sentence or to create a new sentence? ljse it metaphorically?

lJnderstand a joke that uses homonyms (words that sound alike but mean different things, such as 'cents', 'sense', 'scents')?

Second language learners whose goal is to use the language for both social and academic purposes must learn to do all these things.

s9

puof,es eqr ur seJnleal f,neruSeJd puer{aJdluof pue ellerJad or lrr¡qe ,sra -urral pauruexe a Er{ serpnrs rar{ro 'puno.r81oeq eStn8ue¡ tsrg rlaqr ro Io^JI loualogord rraql uI sef,uareglp ol uollelar ur SurztSo¡ode pue Surrr^ul sE l{rns sre qcaads ssa¡dxe sJauJeal qrry^\ ur sler't aql uo pasnf,oJ serl I{cJ¿eseJ sII{r 'rc6GI3l.re¡1-l,rop.reg) ,srlreur8e.rd a8en8ue¡ralul, sE ot PerJeJar sI Jo errlos fpnrs eql a8en8url3o lcadse srgt arlnbcr sreureel a8en8url puoJas ^{oriJo '.rl gu^\ Peqsrug a¡tnol ueq,/I\looq lEI{r e^?q au Sulua¡ punu p,nof

JI Jepuo¡a I, Jo )oog rBI{l eru aAID, JBeq e \Jr luaJaglp fra,r sI Jeualsrl PuB .ra>1eads uea \taq drqsuonrlar aqt tel{t erunsse l¡qeqord PFo,&\ arrr 'aldruexa rog 'sfer't tuaJaglp ul passardxa sr rr uer{^/'r peJarle sl Sururaru cISEg arurs al{l 'llrEIItu¡S 'peqJad\og sraleads erpJo lno 8op arp la8 ot lsenbal tua8rn ue ag rq8lru t¡ ro 'tad oAITJEJIIE uE Joj uolleJlrupe Jo uolssa¡dxa ue apace;d rg8rru r1 .¿8op ;no.( reqr sL se l{rns uopsenb aldurs l¡rua.rrddt ue la¡d¡alur rq8¡ru aqr3o rylql 'suoltentls tuaJeglp uI eAEq uEf, af,uatuas eUJES laql 'suolresJeluoo auo sle¡'r ar{r

lunu

rrqt s8ulueatu luru aqr azluSooa¡ ol uJeel o} Peau

Sur8eueru pur tnorung Sulzru8oca¡ 'sat8o¡ode ro stuarut¡duror or l¡atrlod 8ul -puodsar 'slsanba¡ Sutta¡d¡alul JoJ sllDIS a¡rnbcr ol Paau os¡e lag¡ 'a8enSue¡ Sursn ur ó¡ncg¡p relunooua IIIrs utr laqr 'a8en8ue¡ ra8rer elp Jo l8o¡oqd -rorrl pue xetufs elp Jo a8palmou1 poo8 e Pu" sPro.&\ 000'E Jo f;r¡nqero,r

e a¡lnbce sJeurcal JI ua^E 'eJueJa3ap PuE 'ssauall¡od 'ssaulca.up se s8urr¡r lpnrs aqr st scrleru8er¿ qons ssardxa or rxaluol uI pasn sl a8en8ur¡ ^,oq3o

srIrBrrISBJd

,evn

th* .rr'ffnll i r[o rñt

'J

W7rr",'í

EnrW

Surutaal aSan&ual yuotag

66

Second language learning

language and to judge whether a particular request is appropriate or inappropriate in a specific contexr. Since the early 1990s more research has directly investigated the acquisition of second language pragmatic ability. This includes longitudinal and crosssectional studies describing rhe acquisition ofseveral different speech acts. One that has been the focus of considerable attention is 'requesting'. Requests are an interesting pragmaric feature ro examine because there are identifiable ways in which requesrs are made within particular languages as well as differences in how they are expressed across different languages and cultures.

In a review of longitudinal and cross-sectional studies on the acquisition of requests in English, Gabriele Kasper and Kenneth Rose (2002) outline a series of five stages of development. Stage I consists of minimal language that is often incomplete and highly context-dependent. Stage 2 includes primarily memorized routines and frequent use of imperatives. Stage 3 is marked by less use of formulas, more productive speech, and some mitigation of requests. Stage 4 involves more complex language and increased use of mitigation, especially supportive starements. Stage 5 is marked by more refinement of the force of requests. The five stages, their characteristics and examples are given below.

Stage 1: Pre-basic

Highly context-dependent, no syntax, no relational goals. Me no blue. Sir.

Stage 2: Formalaic Reliance on unanalysed formulas and imperatives.

Lett play the game. Let's eat breakfmt.

Dont look. Stage

3: Unpaching

Formulas incorporated into productive language use, shift ro conventional indirectness. Can you pass the pencil please? Can you do another one for me? Stage 4: Pragmatic erpansion Addition of new forms to repertoire, increased use of mitigation, more

complex syntax.

Could I have another chocolate because mychildren-I have five children. Can I see it so I can copy it?

L9

e Eq tou op oq t sraur?el a8rn8ue¡ u8¡aro3 roJ saeu poo8 sl srql .(¿69¿ asq¡ pue ¡adsr;) a rf,aJa rsou¡ sr uo'f,ursur rrJr¡durr .r"g, .rrgiilrr.r{d;."7 pue s8unres .'ooJss'If, ur pauJBaJ f¡n3ssarcns ag u,f saJnl'al ,rr"-e".a rrp PaleJlsuoruop srq sf,rleru3e-¡d30 8uqf,eal er{l uo qf,J?aseJ ,eJor.uJer{rJnc .suog -JunJ J^nef,runuruof, Jo aSuer rapu\r e or puodsal pu? ef,npord or sraurre¡

salg'ua sq1 '(>¡rorrr dno¡3 pue rled 'a¡druexa ro3) sarnrcnirs uon¿aueg¡o rued¡rlu¿d px' saloJ ruaraJlp ul a8e8ua ol sJauJ'el roJ osl, rng rndur ¡o l¡aue¡. ¡al¿a¡8 e ro3 l¡uo rou senrunr¡oddo ,ro- ,r"'rrr".p ,durqr'a¡ "s;¡ -uBI peseq-Iser pue ,paseg-lualuof, ,a nerrunruruof, u1 .(E rardeq3 ul s¡p Jo uorssnf,srp Jar{unJ aas) toa;.toc l¡¡eclrerurue¡8 a¡aztr ler{l sJf,uelues ¡¡r5

Su,npord uo slelr¡e lsorul' r" rtrrgd*a aqt erer.l.{\ pue xleqpaal Jaqf,E¡ -esuodsa¡ JauJ¿al-uonerlrur Jer{f,eel, r"^.rrrlt"d .tonr"nir,,,r".rr-op,.¡, eJar{^ry\ sluooJsself, paluo5-Jer{3?3r ur anrr l¡¡eDadse sE1ü srqr .slf,E gcaads ruaJaJrp lueur ureal or_sruepnrs roj rrtrtunrioddo arel¡dord& apnord ,oo

plnoJ sruoorsse¡r eSen8uel puoJas tBr{r palunssB s'r\ lr ,arun á.ro1 ,o¡ " rr¡ncsrpa-''os.e^'qo,',.,'o''Jffi l;j"T:jil?::lljjJT''?,i,il1l:il se a,rrarrad or l¡a>¡¡ eJa,/tt. sJosr^pe Jqr rer{r r.torrmáBr,r Buncalai ,.rj ,.ror"r-, ap¡,to:d_or pue uorlf,EJerur Sulsrztpe_ eql ut eloJ e nf,E aJouJ 3 a>pl 1¡1 peuJeal fagr 'a1du-exe ro{ .ólIq" rlreu¡8¿¡d ,s'tprds r,rneu-uou,ql3o ,lerdse r.rroi

ul sse¡80¡d pe^rasqo srer{f,r¿aser er{l 'sqluoruJIEri

E

pue rnojJo pol.red

¿

JaAO

'(asJnof, reql alet ,,asJnof IILaa. I, prES sra>1eads a^neu_uou aql seeJeq.{t srrp J>lEl ot ei1 ppol( I IUIW 1, fes ot pa,uesgo era,/r\ sra>¡eads arr.neu ,aldruexa rog 'uorreSlr¡u Sulsn re sra>1eads e^neu eq] ueqr rdape sse¡ qrnu osle ero \ sra>1eads e^neu-uou ag1 'sasuodsa¡ uollrafa¡ ra>yeads-a,ureu jo ¡ecldÁ rrou, se \ r{f,rq \',speau Áu teeu Janag plno^/v\ esJnof, Jar{lo srqr >lurqr Jo .,esJnoJ I, 13rp r{rr^\ slJrHuof, elnpeqls l¡¡, 8uúes30 pralsur ',esJnof, 1¿r{r ur palseJalur tou. ur? I IuHt J, Surles lg esrnof, relncrued B e{El or uonsa88ns srosr^pB u? rcaler p¡nozrr, fagr 'aldruexe Joc 'ar¿r¡do¡dde,rr ro apnr pug rq8lru srosr^pe or{r reqr sle¡l ur ¡osr,rpe agr lq apeu suollsaSSns pafa¡ or iralmds a^neu-uou egr jo rred eqr uo lcuapuar B osp sBld aJer{r 'lBep re¿t? e prr"rrr,r, sra>1eads e^nBu seeJaq^\ suollsaSSns alBrlrur r_ou plp sra>pads a^rlEu-uou aqr ,e¡düexa Jog 'sue¡d f,rluap?f,B rlaqt Sulleno8au ur ssa3cns Jessal Jo .lal¿a¡B ,rr.¡r or PelnqlJruol saf,ueJaJlp aseqrsuorsses Surslr\p? JrluepesE ur suorlfeles esJnoJ Jrerp passnrsp far¡r se srossa3ord Jreqr qlr \ patefrun{uuoc qsr¡BuE yo s.raleads a^neu-uou pur e neu rplr{ \ ul l¿zrt arp uJa.ry\tag sacua:ag¡p pa^rasqo (e66I) proJueH l¡ra,rag pue BrrreH-r^opreg uae¡pe) .pu"Bu flallsuatxa ueeg osle ser{ suollsaSSns lealar pue rr1"* or ^oq^B.ri,rr"r1 -sez'ur

'arer{t u,r\op

¿eqr{^r. a¡ou¡ lue erar{r sI ryeJnlg auos lnd plnor noÁ

'slxaluof, pue 's¡eo8 'sluedrclr¡ed ol eJJoJ arutsanbar3o Sulunt aurg

Sutuu aut¿ :g aSwg Sutuwal a7un7ual puotag

68

Second language learning

extensive exposure to conversational interaction outside the classroom. The question is no longer whether second language pragmatics should be taught but rather how it can be integrated into classroom instruction.

Phonology fu

noted earlier, grammar has been the focus for second language teachers

long time. Vocabulary and pragmatics have also received more attention in recent years. However, we know less about pronunciation and how it is learned and taught. Pronunciation was a central component in language teaching when the audiolingual approach was dominant. Several techniques for teaching pronunciation were developed at that time, and most of them focused on the pronunciation of segmentals, getting learners to perceive and to produce distinctions between single sounds in minimal pair drills (for example, 'ship' and 'sheep'). and researchers for

a

tVhen the audiolingual approach was replaced by other ways of teaching, attention to pronunciation was minimized if not totally discarded. Furthermore, evidence for the critical period hypothesis, suggesting that nativeJike pronunciation was an unrealistic goal for older second language learners (see Chapter 3), led to the argument that instructional time would be better spent on teaching something that learners could learn more success-

fully. \X/hen communicative language teaching (CLT) was first introduced in the late I970s,little attention was given to the teaching of pronunciation. If it was taught, the emphasis was on suPrasegmentals (rhythm, stress, and intonation)-aspects of pronunciation that were considered more likely to affect communication (Celce-Murcia, Brinton, and Goodwin 1996).

Although research on the teaching and learning of pronunciation is not as extensive as that in other language domains, there is theoretical and empirical work to help us understand the processes involved in phonological development in a second language and the factors that contribute to it. For example, contrastive analysis helps to explain some aspects offirst language influence on second language learners' pronunciation. \le can all think of examples from our own experiences or those of our students. Japanese and Korean learners of English often have problems hearing and produci ng I and r because these sounds are not distinct in their language. Spanish speakers will often say'I e-speak e-Spanish because Spanish words do not have consonant clusters beginning with s at the beginning of a word. French speakers may place stress orthe last syllable of a word because French usually stresses the last syllable. Few languages have the th sounds that are frequent in English, and learners may substitute similar sounds from their first language (for example, r or d, s or z). Sometimes, however, learners overcomPensate for sounds that they know are difficult. Thus, learners may pronounce a th (as in 'thin' or 'this') where a t or a/sound belongs (saying 'thin when they mean 'tirt' for

69

'(LOOZ tltl¿) a8rn8ue¡ Puoras eql uI sluef,f,e ¡a8uo¡ls ezreg feur aSenSur¡ tsrg rraqrJo asn ¡alee¡3 a>ltru ol enunuof, or{^\ stlnpe r€r{r pa Jasgo ueeq oslt ser{ 1I 'uonercunuo¡d pa,r.ordrul or p"el uer aSen8uel puoJes aql ol a¡nsodxa 3o sporred ra8uol reqr parrodar eler{ (1OOZ) a3a1g sauref pue 'lq¡ceyq ue1 'a>1sr¿ uetsJoql 'uonerf,unuord or srorngrJluoc Flruengur sE

pegnuapl ueeg a^eq a8enSue¡ rsJg eqr Jo asn 3o aar8ap aqr pue a8en8ue¡ ra8rer aqt o1 e¡nsodxa 3o edlr pu" tunorue arl] sE r{rns sJorce3 Jar{}O 'alor tu¿t¡odu¡r ue sfe¡d a8enSue¡ tsr5 s.raureel aql ler{t Jeelr osle rl pu" ruqrfgr pue sseJlsJo seJnleal eruosJo uorlrslnbre agr ul lrrre¡lurs.roJ eJuapl^e sr eJer{l 'ssoleqleuoN 'uorrrsmbre ¡er€olouogd aSen8ue¡ puoces ur spunos lenpl^lpul

;o

sacuanbas ¡eruarudo¡a ap aqr

tuaurnfop ol

qf,JEOSeJ

aptrl ueag

sBr{

eJe[L

'uonerf,unuo;d a>¡T-a,rneu elpq or pa8pnl ararrr (asarueuterA ,aldurexa -roj) qrrnq ruory ruetsrp arour era \ sa8enSur¡ tsrg asoqa sraleads er{r Jo auoN 'stuof,f,e elrl-JlnBu a Er{ or paSpnl arezrL (ueu;ag.ro qsl¡8uE ,alduexa -ro3) qclnq or perrlar flaso¡c se^\ ler{t a8en8uel e alods oq.&\ sreurcel esoql l¡uo 'se¡drues qraads agr a8pnl ol pa>lse eJa,/y\ qlrngJo sraleads e ntu ueqA\ 'spuno.r81ceq a8en8ue¡ rsr5Jo Áar¡e,r epra E ruog arum oq,&\ pur pooqrppe rrarp ur r{f,rne paureal pBq or{.&\ sra>leads ruangord IUBH uro.r3 sa¡drues qcaads patf,allof, (666D suae8uog oaql 'sruelsls a8en8uel rar{lo s¿ ila \ sE sragr arurtsrp a8enSuel 'r{f,tnq Jo u¿uJaD 3o raleads r uolterf,unuord

saop ueql qslSug Sulurea¡ ur a8ua¡egr ¡alea;8 E sarBJ esaurr{C Jo .ra>¡eads e

'a¡drurxa.rog zvronl lpear¡e lar¡r sa8en8ue¡ aqt tuo{ rua.ragrp f¡¡epuetsqns sr a8en8ue¡ reqrSl a8en8ur¡ u8laroS ro puof,es relnrnred e ur lcuang;o 1a,ra1 q8q

B r{f,Bal ot ra8uo¡ sJaurcel se>lel tr ter{t uone Jesqo aqr ruorj l¡rred saurol srsa -qrodlq aqr Surrroddns ef,urpr^a aq1 lrlncglp rarrar8 ot peel uec a8en8ue¡ ra8rer agr pue a8en8url a nru s,JauJeel eqr uee,/'lleg eluaJeglp ralrar8 e teql pazrsagrodfg sl rr 'l;e¡ngeoo^ pue ¡eruu¡e¡8 or pre8a.r qlr^\ uaas e^"q a^\ sV

',al¡us, pue ,uoods, se qf,ns spro,r,rjo SuruulSaq agr lE lalv\ol¿ uasur ¡rts tq8lru sJauJ¿el arues Jsaql 'uortcnpord u./v\o Jrar{t ur 'Je^arvioH 'rus pua ds se qrns sJatsnlr Ienru qlr^\ spro r,opnesd (uorrerrlp ruor3) arrrrvr f¡pnsn p¡nor feqr reqt puno; aqs '(sprol'r qsuedg .a\eu, sp algerdacreun aq plno^\ spJo,¡( qloq riSnoqr uala 'üEgz, a>lll asoqt parralar pue ,snds, eTI spro,&opnasd pardaore .bq1 'a41 punos or pasoddns are spro^r qsr8ug regr'r SulzruSorar re poo8 atrnb a¡a¡tr sra>¡eads qsrurd5 aql 'lBeds roqro qrv\r Suncr¡alur roJ sluapnrs 8ur*da.rd sezruSora¡ tegt

le,l

e

jo

ur uouer3unuoJd Surq:ear ro3 acuepm8 sepl,rord (g g¿) ¡

ra{pl¡ ulqo¿ 'Suqeadsjo &.u,Iaqr a8ueq: ol aJB sraurea¡3r parrnbar sr uorl -E Iloru puE 'afueuedxa 'a¡nsodxe 'uorlf,nJlsul Jo uorrBurqruof, E rEqr pu¿ q8noua lou sr uonJnJrsur uorltrfunuo.rd pazrlenlxaruooep reqr reayr lpearp 'uonueltE eJotu 8ururc8 sr uonErfunuord Sulrprer o1 palEler qrJrcsau sr

tI

'GOOZ oJunry pue Surr'r.raq) a8rnSuel puorrs aqrJo ol lue alaJJr sp srql ,r\ar^ sJeuJEa¡ a3en3ue1

sJasn s3 sa,l.rralgo pue s¡eo8 Jrarp

'suosEal puolssaSo.rd pue puosrad JoJ luaf,f,e Puof,as Jer{ro .elll-e^llEu, sJotu e elrrulxo¡dde or pate,r.lroru aq leur'e8en8ue¡ raSrer aqr3o srcadsB Jeqto ur aoueuro3;ad pue a8pay'roul Jo la^al q8¡i ¿ pe^err{f,e a^Er{ or{¡a asogr l1.rr1 -nrlu¿d 'sJeuJ?al a8en8uel puof,es aruos 'snql 'uon?ururrJfslp JoJ srsEg ar{r .suonBnlrs sE pasn sl pue dlqsragueu dnorSSo Ja>lJEtu E sE sa^Jes IIls luaf,JE atuos uI 'uorlErf,unuord

-uetsrl etuos ter{l lre3

,sraleads aSenSue¡ puof,es or f¡artrreSau puodsar sre aSuerlc tou seop aJuepr^a qf,JEJSeJ .llareunrro3u¡

ar.{r

lfirtgrsuaqa¡duoo ro lrrtlqrSqerur pef,npal ur llnsal l¡;essarau lou saop tuaJf,E u8laroS Buo.us e3o aruasard eqt rer{r s.,vroqs (t tOZ) 8uv'r-laq ,bxtaput orunt { lerrn¡zrq lq qJJBasaJ Sa ar'roH 'palBIaJ aJE aeJql aqt reqr rrroqs 8uúrs are ualeads trq.rnr puersJepun or ll¡qe IEnrrE rrJqt pur 'lrllrqrsuaqarduocSo suondacrad rragl 'luaol¿ u8rarojjo suonder¡ad ,sra>pads e^nru gsrlSuE uea \teq sdrqsuorre¡a.r Jo sarPnts 'pJ€^ro} e^rJrs pFoqs sJouJEal lEr{r pJ¿puEls aql sr uonBrsunu -ord a1r1-a,rneu ueql Jarper lrr¡rqr8r¡arur rar{raq \ sl uoltsanb perpler V 'a8en8uel tsJg E sE qsrÉug3o uer{l sraleads aroru JEJ eJ? C-IEJo ^\ou erarp 'paapul '(CTg) atua{ un&uu e se gsÉuE 3o eloJ aqt sserls oq.&\ srelor{rs lueru eqr Suorur are (11g¿) raJoqlplas Eregr'g pu' (E002) sur¡uaf ra¡uuaf pue reues auef'p1ro.rl eql punore atua{an8uq E sE pesn eq ol eruor a Er{ ler{l qsrÉugjosanaue.l.raqtofuetuospeJeeJaqt,,sra>¡eadse ntu,uerp¿ue3,r{snug 'uerleJtsnv 'uecuaury lq gspuE jo suorlerJunuord tuaragrp fueu eJerlt aJE 'anJl ruo5 JEJ sr sqt pue 'qst8ug lralrert llerror a¡8uls e srue

l¡uo

ro¡

3o

arerp rpqr srsaSSns tr r¿qr sl uonsanb aqt qtv'r rua¡qo;d snor^go aug ,:aleads e lleu, B e>lll punos ol sr uonrsrnbce a8rn8u¿l pumas Jo po8 aqr Jer{rer{^ Jo uonsanb eqr o] perEIaJ sr uon¿rfunuo.rd ul sanssr lersJaloJtuof, er{l auo

Jo

'sesself, uorlerf,unuord ul splueuSase¡dns uo slseqdua tuaJJnf, aqr uoddns esaqt aIII s8urpulg 'sJaqlo or graads rrer{lJo ór¡rqr8r¡arur ar{tJo uondac¡ad ,spunos asoqtJo asn Jreqt ur atEJnlfe (sJeuatsrl esBeJf,ur ol ruaas tou pp srqt eJour aJe \ spunos lenprlrpur uo uonf,nJtsur ue¡r8 aJa,{\ or{,la sJeuJeel eql qSnoql ue^E 'spunos Fnpr^rpur uo pasnro3 suossal pe ref,er or{^\ sreureel ueqr

Sututaal a3an3ua1 puotag

72

Second language learning

Sampling learners' language One of the challenges of studying learners' language is the difficulty of collecting samples of their speech or writing that are large enough to ensure that analyses and their findings are based on more than just a few learners or from just a few examples from a larger number of learners. Researchers often find it difficult ro recruit learners, to obtain their consent to participate in a study, and to persuade them to remain available over rhe time periods that are necessary to show development. It can also be challenging to schedule sessions for recording speech or collecting writing samples, and to transcribe or digitize the speech samples for analysis. Computer-based tools are making it possible for researchers to ask and answer new questions and to revisit some of the tentative answers to questions that have been around for a long time. For example, corpus linguistics has provided us with large collections of naturally occurring data that can be used to discover information about the frequency of different language features (words, phrases, grammatical patterns) in a variety of language contexts and registers. Some of these corpora contain language samples that have been collected from newspapers and conversations, whereas others are more specific to particular cypes oflanguage. In addition, there are learner corpora and pedagogic corpora. More and more researchers are making their learner language data available to others so that each corpus oflearner language data can be used for a number of different studies. Some of these corpora are avail-

able

in CD or DVD format or online (Tarone and Swierzbin, 2009). The

links between corpus research and second language teaching are also becoming increasingly apparent (Bennet, 2010; Sinclair, 2004). For example, if a corpus of classroom language reveals that certain features occur frequently in classroom input, teachers might decide to focus on features that occur less frequently. Similarly if corpus research reveals that specific grammatical features are rarely used by native speakers in conversational interaction, teachers (and textbooks) may devote less time to the oral practice of these features.

Summary The language that second language learners produce and understand changes as they have more exposure to the language and as they use it in a greater variety of situations. Describing those changes has been the focus of this chapter. \7e have seen that there are strong patterns ofsimilarity across learners ofdifferent ages, learning in different contexts, and starting from different first language backgrounds. The focus of this chapter has been mainly on these similarities. In Chapter 3, we will turn our attention to some of the ways in which learners differ from each other and how those individual differences affect how quickly and how well they succeed in second language

acquisition.

€,1

'a8pa¡mou1 f.re¡ngeco,r Surssesse pue Sulqcear

ur pe^lo ur asoqr pur Sulurea¡ lre¡nqeco,r jo sa8ua¡¡erp eqr qloq puprs -Jepun ol qsr.^\ orf'r stuapnls atrnperS-tsod pue sraqceel JoJ txel elgrsseffe puB lelluessa u¿ sureuJeJ lr 'auo srql ef,urs pagsrlqnd uaag a^Br{ Suru;ra1 pue Surqcear lre¡ngeco^ uo $looq lueru qSnoqr¡y .a8rn8ue¡ u8raroS Jo puofas e ur tuarudole^ap ,ftr1ngeco,r Sunsal pue Sulgceal JoJ suon -eorldrul Jrar{r pue ,iroaqr pue r{JJBesJJ sJelof >looq elrsuaqardruoo srql 'ssar¿ flrs;e,uun e8plrqure3 :a8pr-rque3 ,hapqatol&utu"raa7.I00Z A .S .I (uolrrN 'a&rn&ua7

uqiouv

ux

'le^JI arenpe¡8-rsod aqr te r{f,Jeesa¡ uonrsrnb¡r aSen8ue¡ puofes uo 8uq-reqrue aJe oq./!\ stuepnts ot lsaJelur pnads Jo aq ilv\\ looq eql 'pasn ag uEf, slool ralndulof, .&oq uo .&\olreg Iaeqrry{ lq rardrqr B sE IIe./d se 'srsl¡eue pJnllnforf,os pue ,slsl¡eue lcuanba.r3 ,srsl¡eue ;oua Surpn¡cur 'r¡ceordde f,nllEUB .rrlnclrred e ol pato ap sr 'tatdeqr rll€E .ErEp Sulslpue pue Sui.raqre8 ro3 sanbrugf,at pue spoqtatu3o a8ue¡ e Sulsn gc;easal per{srl -qnd jo./r\arleJ e rsuatxe uE sE sa Jes osp rI .a8en8ue¡ raureal Sune8rlsa,rul or sagceo;dde tueJaglp ol srepear sarnporlur aSan&uaT uutaaT SutsQruy 'ssar¿ Álsra,r¡un pro1xo :pro3xo z&an&uaT uutaaT &uts,(luuv.g¡¡Z.uazprplrpg .D pue .U .sllg

Sulpear requry roJ suorrsat8n5 ¿saJnlea, a8en8ue¡ lueJeJIp eseql

eql rlaueJ uorlf,nJlsur pue uorl)pJatut

jo eruet.rodur

LuooJsseltr Jo, satltJot.rd

¡u¡qr

nol o6 s¡rler.u3e.ld ¿l3o¡ouoq¿ ¿l.re nqero¡ sauaqdrou lef, rt€ui uer g ¿Japro pJoM ¿ruooJss€ll eLll aprstno l¡e,rrrra¡¡a a3en8ue¡ asn ot ltr¡¡qe Jraql lle#€ or l¡a¡r¡ tsoLu aJE a8en8ue¡;alur rsJeuJeal ¡o sl:adse req¡¡ € ¿

¡

¿

¿lool lnlesn e eq Plno^ ,lset 3n^ , aqr Iu!ql nol o6 ¿llnlultp aq plno^ )utqr nol op sauo q)!q¡¿Jo, slxatuof, eleeJf ol lsee l¡e,r,r1e¡a; eq plno A sauaqdrour auos ¡u¡qr nol oC ¿ I 'Z a;n8r¡ ur polsll sauaqd.rou aql ¡o qlee ro, stxaruof, ol sJauJeal Surpea¡ ul a^rl)e#a Norrl aq plno/v\ )sel ¡o put) reqM¿sar.uaqdrou ¡er¡reruue.rS¡o uollslnb¡e

l.rore8r¡qo al€eJf,

Surtr.r¡,r -ro 3ur¿eeds

aqr¡o lpnS

e

¿arrnbre

lo¡ a3en8uel JeuJEel¡o ol uoql

sa¡dr.ues

trallol nol

p¡norr,r

^

oH

Z

Jo, tuoas seJnt€e, reqM¿spJo^ ¡erred5 NapJ€Ll u¡ees s.¡auJEel teq/v\ lnoqe )urr{},uorleSau

¿JepJo pJo^ tr sl'lsJu allou qsr¡3u3 Jo, peqtJlsep ueeq spq

ol

leql aruanbas ¡eluaudo¡a^ep eql le 3ur¡oo1 suaned

Jo selnJ ¡eleua3 aqt eJE req¡¡ | uoll)olror ro, suollseno

¿qsr¡8u3 ur se)uelues arrte3eu ¡o

Eurutaal aSunBuE yuotag

/4

Second language learning

Tarone, E. and B. Swierzbin. 2009. ExphringLearner Language' Oxford: Oxford University Press. The authors collected speech andwriting samples from a group of English language learners from different L1 backgrounds ParticiPatingin the same t"rkr. Thit created a data base showing how each learner tried to achieve the same communication goals. The texr is supplemented by a DVD ofthe learners engaged in the oral tasks. Exercises focus on different.ap_proaches to understanáing th. learners' emerging language systems, including error analysis, developmental sequences, learners' response to feedback, and communication strategies. Many of the ideas that are introduced in this chapter of How Langiaga Are Learned are illustrated in the examples of

learners'language that are presented in this book.

sasuodsar oq] daa)'aBEn?ue¡ u8re.ro¡ Jo puo)es e Bururea¡ ¡o se:uauadxa lnoqe sJeqtleu l¡ltue¡ lo.sen8ea¡¡otr.spuat4 leJelas atlJalut,a.lleuuollsanb eqt ¡o sardor leuoDrppe Surs¡ rau"ree¡ eSenSue¡ e ^se a¡uar.¡adxa u¡,ro .¡nol uo

pegal or | '€ elqel

ut aJteuuotlsanb eqr asn

laldeqr stql peeJ nol e.ro¡ag

a)uelJodxe tu¡u;eel otentupl uo

lfeBau ,t.rt^trrv

'seurof,lno 8ulu.rea1 pue sarusJaJrp uea.^Atag sdrqsuorrelar ar¡r IEnpr^rpur puBtsJepun ol tqSnos e^Er{ tErlt sarpnls eqtJo etuos./\ .ar^eJ IIr^, a,^a :ardeg:

srr{l uJ ¿a8e rrarp Jo 'uorls noru Jrar{l 'saril1rge lenrsallaru cglrads pue ¡aaua8 Jrerp 'senrlBuosrad,srauleel lnogE uorlEurJoJur aAEr{ oAUl ronrrrn'br" a8en8uel puoJesJo sserJns aqt ur safueragrp rclpard e1,r u¿f r.trr*, r¿r{^\ or ;u13aq

Sulurea¡ qllq¡a re a8e agr pue 'uolre,rrlotu 'acuaSrllarur

aJE

Buru;ea¡

a8en8uel ul ssef,rns rcrpe.rd ol pa erlaq ueUo srnsrJarr'rerlr .reqro ,órpuoi -.lad Sulo8rno ue ol uorrrppe uI .sraureal Injssef,rns tsoru eql aq IIr^{ sllHs ol sanrunlJoddo laas pue a8en8uel puomt rqi .r¡ uonrq a8en8uel aslrre¡d

-Iqur lnoqrr./v\ lf,?Jelur oq/!\ sluspnrs pelJe oJlxa rerp pefur^uof, eJ? sJer{f,Ea] 'aldruexa Joc 'u1'rourl a^Er{ e.tr a¡doedjo rer{r Jo arual¡adxa u^ro Jno uo

lueu

paseq eq

feu

sJalleq

qcng '3ulurea1 a8rn8ue¡ ur arnllEJ ro ssef,f,ns rrpard uer ltr{t saf,uareJlp lenpt,l'rpur t¿ql e€rleq sn3o lueyr¡

Jeureal eql ur luerar{ur are

'a8en8ue¡ puores e Suru;ea¡ ur paaf,rns or Ál¡qe rreql o1 Psrelal ar¿ sFnpl^lpur Jo s3nsrJalfBrer{f ar{l Surpuersrapun ur ^\or{ lsaJelur uEéA"rl sJsr{f,JEesal puB sJolE3npe qlog 'Ápeata sarJ¿^ ssaf,fns esorl^/v\ 'sraurea¡ a8en8uel puof,es 3o aruarradxe Jno r{rr.r\ slseJruof srqr .Jruu JaAo

a8en8ue¡ arp esn ol sJnrunlroddo arenbape a^eq laqr reqr papr,r.ord ,pooq ur ueql or (pau8rs -ro) ualods ere ler{t sa8en8ue¡ -ro a8en8ur¡ agt ^pllyrl¡rea 8ul¡lnboe ur InJssef,f,ns sle.la,¡e lsorup aJe uaJplrr{J ,1 .rerdeq3 ur ,l\¿s er\ sV

/ú.eIAaJd

DNINUVfl-I

E)VNDNVf CNOf,iIS NI NiIUfl { T I CI fVN

Sfl f,

CI

IAI CINI

76

Indiuidual dffirences in

second language learning

to the quest¡onnaire and refer to them

as

you read this chapter about

individual differences in second language learning.

la

What language do you speak best? Do you speak more than one language equally well?

lb When did you begin to learn this language (these languages)? 2 Which second or foreign language(s) have you learned with the mosf successl

3

Which second or foreign language(s) have you learned with the leost success?

4

For the languages you mentioned in response to questions 2 and 3, answer the following questions in the appropriate columns:

Languages learned successfully How old were you when you first tried to learn the

language?

Did you have a choice about learning this language or were you required to learn it?

Do you currently speak this language regularly? Do you regularly read this language

for information or enjoyment?

How much of your learning experience

with this language was in a foreign language classroom?

lf you no longer use this language on a daily basis, can you estimate how many years you sPent learning or using it? Estimate how many

hours of classroom instruction you had for this language.

Languages not learned successfully

LL

a8en8ue¡ eqr uo sarocs g8¡q J^Eq osp III^\ arreuuo¡rsanb uone^rrour eqt uo sa.rors q3¡q qtr^\ sreur€al reqr $ l f1a1r¡ Jo uontf,lpur u€ sr uon¿lar 'uopelaJJoJ E pellel arnpaco;d ^\or{ Ief,nsnets E sasn Jar{JJEasJJ JrF pue -JoJ

eql

'pelo)s qtoq are err¿uuonsenb aqr pue tser aql 'fruarcgord a8rn8ue¡ puores Jraql ssJSsE or pasn sr tsetJo pur¡ eruos uaql 'uone^noru Jrer{l3o ea.r8ap pur adlr aqr aJnseeru ot aJreuuonsanb e ruaqr arrr8 pu¿ slauJeal jo dnor8 E lfelas l¡ensn daqt 'saruortno Suru¡¿a1 a8en8ue¡ puofas ot parEIeJ sr uonplnour rno Sulpug ur palsaJelur eJE sJer{JJEeseJ uar{Ar 'auop se

qf,ns elq¿rJt^

l¡rnsn

sr

E

^roq

Suru;ea1 a8en8uel puof,es uo saf,uaraJlp Ienpr^rpulJo aruengur aqr

uo qf,Jeasal ¡aoq aquf,sep or

sr uorssnf,srp

rno ur8ag ot le¡'r tsag eql sdegra¿

sJnsrJelJBJsrlJ Jaurcel uo rlJJsaseu exa¡taQxa Swutoa¡ eF,on8luo¡ u¡ satuataltp pnpt^,pq ssar¿

¿l¡rsea a8enSue¡ /v\au E suJ€a¡

¿ezrl€Dos

tT

eMDl

Arsra,uu¡ pJorxo O a¡qerdororoq¿

oq*r uosrad e se ¡¡asrnol jo )u!ql nol oq

ol sa)!l oqr"r uosred

e se ¡¡asrnol ,o ¿urq] nor(

¿snefqns loot1ls Jaqlo ul luapnls lnlsse))ns e

oq

nol erar*¡ery ¿e8en8ue¡ srqt

ur

fte¡nqeror Surlpnrs lofua nol plp/o6 ¿e8en8ue¡ s¡qr

¡o rer,uuer8 eqr Surlpnrs

lofua no,( plp/o6

¿a8en8ue¡ s!qr )Peds oq^ l¡rr.ue¡ .ro s.raed

sJaquau a,req

nol op'a¡dr.uexa

ro1 ¿a8en8uel srql ol slueuqf,ell€ leuorlou¡e

ro ¡euoslad ¿

arreq no,(

oq

(lr¡s.ra,r¡un'fu epuoras

f.reruauala) le^al leq/v\ rV ¿loorlls le slralqns Jeqlo uJeal ol a8en8ue¡ aql pasn nol ane¡1 ¿ue>¡ods sr a8enBue¡

eql eJeq^

ere¡d e ur Surnr¡ tuads

nol

e^€q au¡p qf,ntu /v\oH

Sututaal a8an&uq yuotas ut sacuata[ty pnrunryuJ

78

Indiuidual dffirences in

second language learning

test. If the two variables (motivation and language proficien?) are found to be correlated, the researcher will try to discover just what the relationship between them is. Note that correlations may be positive or negative. That is, one may find a pattern suggesting that learners with higher motivarion scores have higher language proficiency s cores (a positiue correlation) , or one might, in some circumstances, find that learners with lower motivation scores do better on proficiency measures (a negatiue correlation).

Although the correlation procedure seems straightforward, it requires careful interpretation. One problem is that, unlike variables such as height or age, it is not possible to directly observe and measure motiyation, extroversion, or even intelligence. These are just labels for an enrire range of behaviours and characteristics. Furthermore, characteristics such as these are not independent of each other, and researchers have sometimes used the same label to describe different sets of behavioural traits. For example, in motivation quesdonnaires, learners may be asked how often they use their second language outside a classroom context. The assumption behind the question is that those who report that they frequently do so are highly motivared to learn. This seems reasonable, but it is not so simple. If a learner responds that he or she frequently interacts with speakers of the second language, it may not be because he or she is more motivated to learn than one who reports less interaction. Rather, it might be that this individual lives where rhere are more opportuniti a greater necessiry-for language practice than those who report a low frequency of interaction. Because it is usually impossible to separate these two variables (i.e. motivation or desire to interact and opportunities or the needto interact), we cannot conclude whether it is motivation, necessiry or opportuniry that is being measured by this question. Perhaps the most serious error in interpreting correlations is the conclusion

that one of the variables causes the other. The fact that two things tend to occur together or increase and decrease in a similar pattern does not necessarily mean that one causes the other. \X/hile it may be that one variable influences the other, it may also be that both are influenced by something else entirely. Research on motivation is perhaps the best context in which to illusüate this. Learners who are successful may indeed be highly motivated. But can we conclude that they became successful because of their motivation? It is also plausible that early success heightened their motivation, or that both success and motivation are due to their special aptitude for language learning or the favourable context in which they were learning. Another difficulry in assessing the relationship between individual learner characteristics and second language learning is how language proficiency is defined and measured. In the L2 learning literature, some studies report that learners with a higher intelligence quotient (IQ) are more successful language learners than those with a lower IQ, while other studies report no such correlation. One explanation for these conflicting findings is that the language

6L

leql Sururcel ol sauof, lr ueq{\ rotf,rpeJd Suo.lls r aq leu srsar }1 puon -rperr lq parnseau &l¡qe Jo puq er{r rer{t slsaSSns srql 'sllDls uonrnpord IEJO ol PerEIaJun sez'r u 'lre¡nqEf,o PuE teruue¡8 'Sulpear a8en8uel PuoJas rlf,uar{ 3o ruaurdola^ap aqt or pareler ser* aruaSq¡erur elq r 'rerp puno3 9L6D eesauaD paJ{ 'EpEuEJ ur seuure¡8o¡d uors¡auul qluar¿ ur stuap -nrs qrv'r fpnls E ur 'alduexa .rog 'rbr¡rqe s^nefrunururor ol upr{l a8pa¡l|ou1 rnsrn8ur¡eraru ol pat¿lar l¡Suorrs aJoru rg feur srsar |1 'aloqe parsaS8ns se ta aA\oH 'Sulurea¡ a8en8ue¡ puof,as ur ssa)f,ns SulrcrpardSo sueaur pooS e a;ar"r saroos |I rEql u.^aor{s sEr{ r{fJeaseJ auros 's.real aql Je^O 'Peuodar uaaq seurrtaruos seg Sururta¡ a8en8uel puof,as pue arua8l¡elul uoa,ütag >lurT E put 'loor{fs ur ssa3rns r{tr,t\ palErf,os$ uauo aJE slsal eseql 'slsatJo spur¡ ul?lJaf uo afuerrJJoJrad ot ra3ar ol pesn uaaq flpuorrrpeJl ser{ ,acuaSl¡¡atul, ruJat eql

aruaSqlaruI 'saurof,lno Sururra¡ ur sefueJaglp.roJ suon¿ueldxa ra,rooslp or uoga aql uI pateSltsa,rul uaeq aleq reql sf,rlslJero¿Jtql pnpl^lpul el{rJo auos lE >lool s,ra-I 'srgeueg lelal:os Jar{ro pur 'lulrqou 'ruaufoldura 'uotle:npa JoJ sanrunuoddo Surdeqs uo seq Sulu*a¡ aSen8uel puooes loedrur snourroue ar{r Jo asneJag pauJef,uol oslr sI Álunruuor re8rrl ag1 '8ulu;ea¡ aSen8ut¡ puof,es ur sserf,ns a^erqf,E ol sf,rlslJarf,eJ€qf, luaJe¡Ip I{tylr sJJuJeel Surd¡ar¡3o sfellpug or edoq sJolernpg '8ururea1 uerunl{Jo Sulpuers:apun rauaq e urc3 laqr tBqt os 'salual¡edxa (sJeuJeel qtl^\ tleJarur laqr rtog PuE ParEIaJ aJe uec

selqerJe^ lrr¡euosr:d pue a,ttttuSof, ruaJaglp ,/v\ol{ ,&\orDl ol 1aes sJal{rJease¡ 'sJolef,npe pu" sJer{fJtaseJ qroq ol acuel¡odrur rearS3o sI eaJe slql uI I{f,JEesaJ 'ssalar{ue^eN'a8ua¡¡zqr e st Suturea¡ e8enSur¡ Puo3es uI ssaf,f,ns PuE'suollen -lrs lerfos (sfnsrJerfeJtql Fnpr^Ipul uaa,&uag dtgsuorre¡ar aqr SulpuersJePun

'rrrpa-rd ppo,/'r s3nsrJarlt -JEr{J eseqt rer¡r

fcualcgord aqr a^aII{JE lou r(eru

sJauJeel

a8rn8url lryssaf,f,ns

3o ¡rrldfi sJrlsrJarf,eJer{J IEuoI}E^Ilotu pue a,rntuSo¡ JI{t qtl.^a a8en8uel r'lau e greorddr or{^\ spnpr^lpul 'suotrlpuof, Ielf,os esoqr uI 'sJeI{JEel uela Pue 'sen8ea¡¡oc 'sraad qtrrn uorlefrunruuJo¡ ul a8e8ua ol sallluntJoddo rlaqr rlrurl tEr{t salnf,Erd ¡euotrecnpe pue l"rros lq pazr¡euÉrcru uauo ool are sdno¡8 lr¡rounu pur tuer8ruuJl aruos Jo sJegruery 'uolt¿f,Iunrutuoo uI s¡aut¡ed panF se pa,rracrad are lagr eJer{^/rl. suorlsnlrs ur sdrqsuonEleJ lBrf,os ol ssatr3B urc8 ol alge rou a.re faqr 3l InJssaf,rns aq rou l¿ru uoltls¡nb¡e a8en8uel JIeL{l '8ururca¡ a8en8ur¡ InJssef,f,ns qrl^\ porelf,osse ueeg e^EI{ rerlt scltslJalfeJeqf, er{Uo etuos ssessod sFnpI^IpuI uaq.^aue^a'tegt an8rr (tOOZ) lagoo¡uaa¡1a; pu" uouoN luuog 'sa^loslueqt pug sraurml r{lf{¡ ur s8utuas Fuonef,nPa eql lunof,f,E olur elBl osp lsnuJ seJusJaJIP I"nPIAIPUI uo qf,Jeasau PUE Ierf,os

'a8pa¡rrroul cnsm8urptauJ eJnseeur IEI{I slset o} uerp buang leuollesJe uoJ 'a8pe¡,lou>1 Jo sernwaur 01 patrlerro: l¡aso¡c ssel aq feul |1 'a¡drurxa .rog Jo puH arups er{t aJnsearu rou op salpnrs rueraglp uI pesn stsat fcualcgord Sutuwal a7un&ual puotas ut satuata[tp pnruaryuJ

B0

Indiuidual dffirences in

second language learning

involves language analysis and rule learning but may play a less important role outside the classroom or in classrooms where the instruction focuses more on communication and interaction. Indeed, many students whose general academic performance is weak experience considerable success in second language learning if they are given the right opportunities.

Many educators have been infuenced by Howard Gardner's (1993) proposal that individuals have 'multiple intelligences' and that traditional IQ tests have assessed only a limited range of abilities. Among the 'multiple intelligences' Gardner includes abilities in the areas of music, interpersonal relations, and athletics, as well as the verbal intelligence that is most often associated with success in school.

Language learning aptitude Specific abilities thought to predict success in language learning have been studied under the title of language learning'aptitude'. One of the pioneers in this area, John Carroll (1991), has characterized aptitude in terms of the abiliry to learn quickly. Thus, we may hypothesize that a learner with high aptitude may learn with greater ease and speed but that other learners may also be successful

ifthey

persevere.

Over several decades, the most widely used aptitude measures have been the Modern LanguageAptitudeTest (MtAf) (Carroll and Sapon 1959) and the Pimsleur Language Aptitude Battery (PIAB) (Pimsleur 1966). All the tests are based on the view that aptitude has several components, for example, the abiliry to identify and memorize new sounds, understand the function of particular words in sentences, figure out grammatical rules from language samples, and remember newwords. V/hile early research revealed a substantial relationship between performance on the MLAI or PLAB and performance in foreign language learning, these studies were conducted at a time when language teaching was based on grammar translation or audiolingual methods.

\üfith the adoption of a more communicative approach to teaching, many teachers and researchers came to believe that the abilities targeted by these tests were irrelevant to the process of language acquisition. However, others suggest that some of the abilities measured by aptitude tests are predictive of success even in settings where the emphasis is on communicative interaction. For example, Leila Ranta (2002) found that children who were good at analysing language (one component of aptitude that is targeted by the tests) were the most successful learners in an English second language programme in which acdvities almost never involved direct attention to grammar.

Nick Ellis (2001) and others have hypothesized that working memory

(\lM)

capacity may be the most important variable in predicting success for learners in many language learning situations. \Working memory, also called

I8

teBJBt eqr efnpoJd tou prp tnq uonfnJtsur JEururErB paseq-epr rnr¡fu pa^refeJ dno¡8 uonf,nJlsur tndur pa;ntcnJts eqt ur sJeuJEe'I 'ruaqr acnpord ol ueq] pue sunouord rcalgo rcarrp lg pafa,,'uoo s8urueau rueJeJlp aqt rno arn8g or uaqr pa8r.rnorue leqt senr^nJe ur paredrcrrred laql peelsur :uou -rnJlsur ¡erurue¡3 ou pe^rareJ dno¡8 a^nf,npur eqt ur sJeuJEaT 'pauJeel pcrtr

laqr sa¡n; aqr esrlrerd ol Árunl¡oddo aqt lq pa.uo¡1o3 uor]f,nrtsur ¡eu¡u¡el$ peseg-elnJ urrldxa pa^raf,f,J dno¡8 uoulnJlsur a rrnpap aqr ur sJauJEJ-I 'r{f,uaJC ul sunouo¡d rcalgo loeJrp uo uorlJnJtsurJo sadlr rr¡a -¡aJIP ua,u8 pue sdno¡8 aarr{l olur pepl^¡p ueqr ara,trlagl droruaru 8ur{¡o,q pue 'lrr¡rqr Surpoc oruauogd 'lrlllq" cnfpue a3en3ue1 :apnrrrde a8en8ue¡_¡o saJnsearu aeJr{} uo pessas$ aJa \ sluepntg'ndut yatnprutlt pue'a(t4Jn?ut 'aau -rnpa? peller aqs qrlr{¡a 'uortrnrtsur 3o sadlr luera5lp eaJr{r Jo ssaua^nlajg; eqr pu¿ apnrrrde ure^\teg drgsuolte¡ar E se,vr ararp reqrer{^\ paroldxa (E002} tuEIrE lreruaso¡ 'puvlv¿2,/\laN ur a8enSue¡ u8la.ro3 e se qf,uerC Jo slurp -nts lrepuoras qlr^\ fpnrs e ruo5 seuJof lerrr aues aql ur sJauJeal IIe t5euaq touuer uononJtsur jo edlr 'telnrrued E rer{r turelf, er{r JoJ r¡oddns JerlunJ

'salgord apnrlrde rua.ra¡ -JIp r{l¡,l\ sJauJeel atBporuruorfp ol parJe^ lpuarcgns aff sarlr^rtfe Sulqcear Jraqt reqr eJnsue ot elqe ag leru sJaqf,Eel 'stuapnls Jraqt ot saf,ror{f r{fns JeJo allrila, 'Per{flErusru ara^\ oq,^a asoqr ueql luatue^eqrBJo

Plnor slooq3s

^&\aJ

s1a,ra1 raqSrq lpuergluS¡s urelte ol elge ara./!\ sluapnts Per{rrEu reqr persl -lpul elueprle euros 'uotttpp€ uI 'slueruuornua Surgcear algnedruof, r{rt,lr sluePnls uaq,/v\ uoIlf,€JSIIES JaI{fEel Pu€ ruaPnls 3o 1a,La1 q8rq

PeqlrEIU

aJa,&\

e parrodar aq3salN'sa¡go.ld epnrrrde rrerll ot puodsauoo lou plp t¿qt sasselr ul paceld aJelr\ stuepnls 's8urdno¡3 elglredtuoour aql uI 'a8en8ut¡ puof,as alp Jo asn puonrun3 er{} punore pazrueSro ssEIf, E ur pareld ere¡a sllDIS clrf¡tue a8e¡a¡'e tnq.{roruau poo8 gurvl sJeuJeel :seJnlfnJts pcneruue;8 uo pesn)o3 ter{l Sulr{Jeat ot pau8lsse a¡a¡'r f¡oruatu a8e¡a,re rnq lrl¡qe onl¡eue q8rq qrr,r,r sluapnts 's8urdno¡3 alqp¿dtuor ar{} uI 'a¡go.rd apnrnde rraqt qtr^/r elqlred

-uJof,ur ro alglreduol JJr{lra eJe,r\ terlt sau¡ue¡8o¡d leuortonJ}sur ur pareld erea oq^\ sruepntsJo sse¡8o¡d eqr perpnrs (tge t) er{rsal¡ auofrel¡¡ 'r{ruerC Jo sJauJrel tlnpe JoJ aruue¡8o¡d aSen8ue¡ uerpeue3 E uI 'sauue¡8o¡d Ieuononrlsu¡ 3o sadlr luaraJtlp ur peerrns or lr1¡¡qe rreql roJ tunocce feru stuauodruoc apnrrrdr tuaJeJtlp asaqt ur sassJrDlee,&\ put sqr8uerls (sJeuJEa'I

'slsf¡eue e8enBue¡ ul sertrTrgE e8e¡a¡e l¡uo rnq serJouJeu¡ 8uo¡ts a,req feu aruos 'aldruexe Jo{ 'apnrrrde 3o sluauodruof arpJo ¡e ur Suons eg tou peeu sJeuJEe¡ a8en8ue¡ InJSSafJns reqr srsaSSns (686I) uer{a>ls rata¿ d;ouraru 8uq¡or'r ul ssaco¡d uer fagt uotr -eruJoJur Jo tunoule ar{r ur JeJIp slenpr^rpur pue 'erult ua,rr8 e te passacord aq uEf, uolttruJoJur Jo lunorue uretJof e l¡uo ter{} sueeru reql 'perrturl sr l¡oruaru Suqrornr'peepul a8re¡ l.ra,r s¡ lrloeder f¡otuaru urer-8uo¡ 'btxdec q8noqrpuoneruJo;urJo Sulssaco¡d aArD¿ arlt ol sJaJeJ ,(¡oruau uJJet-lJoLIS, 8uru"taa1 aSan&ual puotas ur satuau{tp pnrun?puJ

82

Indiu idual diferences in

se co

nd. language learn

i

ng

forms. Instead they participated in activities that exposed them to spoken and written examples of direct object pronouns.

f I wo¡ulcr if Wu've ever ( L A*t, ürtd,'üwt' thirlpeñrorr

t'T!W'Yñ

q a

Erlam found that all learners benefited from the deductive instruction regardless of differences in aptitude. This was interpreted as support for Peter Skehan's (1989) hypothesis that more structured teaching may even out individual differences compared with less structured teaching. Erlam's findings also showed that learners with greater language analytic ability and memory capacity were able to benefit more from the inductive and structured input instruction on written (but not oral) tests. This supports the hypothesis that learners with greater aptitude can figure out the rules of language based on input, and that they are able to consolidate this knowledge without the need to produce language-at least in terms of their written abiliry. Before we leave the topic of language learning aptitude, it is perhaps appropriate to look at two extremes of the aptitude continuum. Some people whose academic performance is usuallyvery good find themselves frustrated in their attempts to learn a foreign language. Lenore Ganschow and Richard Sparks (2001) and their colleagues have studied many cases of young adults who find foreign language learning exceedingly difficult. They identified several ways in which these students differ from successful learners. Most perform poorly on at least some of the measures that make up aptitude tests. Some have problems with certain kinds ofverbal skills, even in their own language. \What is perhaps most important about this research is that, with great effort and instructional support, some of these students are able to succeed in spite of their difficulties. The challenge is to find instructional approaches that meet the needs of learners with a variety of aptitude profiles.

E8

'drgsuonela; aqrJo erntru agr.,frruapr ot pepeeu aq III^\ r{rreesrr eror.u ltr{r epnlf,uor ot (9002) uEr{eIS retad pue raluroq ug\oz

,Je^a \oH .8urureal a3en3ue1 puof,es ur ssas3ns Pel r{J.rceseJ 3r{1 Jo ./v\er^al E puB aJuapuedapur plag uae.^uaq dlqsuonelar 8uo¡ls e sE,4a erar{t tEqr par:odar

l¡aplr'r

se,u rr

'srraf3o regurnu

E

JoC 'JUo xaldruoc eJouJ

E

ur pappaqua adeqs

cr.nauoa8 a¡drurs e pu5 ol pa>lsr a¡e slurdnrlred rlcrgm rJr. 1ulrp

tou prp oq.,nl. esoqr ueqt slsat uortrr3unuo.rd uo rarraq prp IoqoJIEJo stunorue .uo¡l¡qFlul elnpaJ IIErus 1uerp oq,ra. sruedlrrrred lpnrg 'uonerrunuord uo or lrrTlge str JoJ u^\oDI (lor{mle Jo sesop IIErus jo slJage aqt Jo srsf¡eue ue pe^lo^ur lpnrs aug 'of,urruJoJJad uon¿r¡unuo¡d a8en8uel puoras roJ tseel t¿ 'ef,roJ alne8au E sr uorlrgqur ler{t urelr aqr ro3 rroddns puno3 (T,L6l) sanSra¡oc sry pur Erorn3 JJpuExa[V'sOL6l eqr ur serpntsJo serJas E uI .sre -u;ea¡ ra8unol ueqr snorf,suof-Jles aJouJ aJE or{^\ ,slueJsalope .roj rua¡qord eg o¡ paraprsuoJ uarJo sr srql 'Sulurea¡ a8en8ur¡ ul ssarSord.roS re¡nrnred

B

Sutunal aBanBuE puotas ut

satua.ta¡ftp pnrult?puJ

B6

Indiuidual diferences in

second language learning

A learner's willingness to communicate (\MTC) has also been related to anxiety. \fe have all experienced occasions when we tried to avoid communicating in a second language. \fTC may change with the number of people present, the topic of conversation, the formaliry of the circumstances, and even with whether we feel tired or energetic at a given moment. A colleague in Canada, who works in the area of second language learning and speaks several languages, recently confessed that he avoided the corner store in his neighbourhood because the proprietor always spoke French to him. He recognized the proprietor's efforts to help him improve his skills in this new language, and was grateful for it, but, as he told us with embarrassment, it was just easier to go to the store where he could use English.

This is consistent with research carried out by Richard Clément, Peter Maclntyre, and their colleagues, who argue that learners who willingly communicate in a wide range of conversational interactions are able to do so because of their communicative confidence. In a series of studies they have shown that communicative confidence is shaped by rwo variables: how relaxed L2 learners are and how competent (or incompetent) they feel about their L2 abiliry. These factors are directly infuenced by previous contacts with L2 speakers and are considered to be the main contributors to communicative confidence (Clément, Baker, and Maclntyre 2003). Several other personaliry characteristics such as self-esteem, empath¡ dominance, talkativeness, and responsiveness have also been studied. The research

does not show a clearly-defined relationship between one personality trait

and second language acquisition. And, as indicated earlier, the major difficulty in investigating personaliry characteristics is that of identification and measurement. Another explanation has been offered for the mixed findings. Personaliry variables seem to be more consistently related to conversational skills than to the acquisition of grammatical acctrnacy or academic language. Finally, most of the research on personality variables has been carried out within a quantitative research paradigm, that is, an approach that relies heavily on relating learners' scores on personaliry questionnaires to their language test performance. Some researchers have argued that a more quali tative approach to understanding and investigating personality variables is needed to adequately capture their depth and complexiry especially as they emerge and evolve over time. Despite the contradictory results and the problems involved in carrying out research in the area of personaliry characteristics, many researchers believe that personality will be shown to have an important influence on success in language learning. This relationship is an intricate one, however, in that it is probably not personality alone, but the way in which it combines with other factors, that infuences second language learning.

LB

I{sruEdS tear8 E rnoqE lurr{ sllal puerU e ralEl {ea,{\ V 'asrnof, eqt dorp ol seproap llpr5 pur (uone,ulour elnnoaxa) sasselc or Suro8 sdors 'asrnoc agr r{rr,la pet€Jtsn{ seruooag aq suossal reruurrS3o srpuoru ,/(aJ e JaIV '(uortr,r -rlou Jf,roqr) asrnor gsruedg B e>l€l ol saproep pue uredg ot dl¡t Sunuo¡dn ue tnoqe parrrxa $ puelod ur raureel Ioorlrs frepuoras E :eg ppo,/r\ saseqd asaqr r¡Snorqr alcfr rq8nu auo rnror.{Jo a¡druexa uV'af,uer.uroJ.rad rlagr ot uonf,eer pue Jo ¡esre.rdde (stuapnls ol sJeJaJ ',uonf,edsoltal uon¿^noru, 'aseqd prrqr aql pue (uonE rlour urclureuJ of $lsel l¡¿ssaceu aqt tno Sull¡¡e¡ lnoqB sr ',uorJelrloru alnnf,axe, 'aseqd puofas aqr 's¡eo8 Suuas ol pue palJels Sunra8 ot sJaJaJ (uonBlnour elror{J, 'aseqd rsJy aql 'saseqd aaJqt Jo stsrsuof, ler{l uorl¿ noruJo Iaporu paluerro-ssaco.ld e padola,rap (¿tOOZ) lafurog ugtloz

'arun Ja^o aceld a>1er regr sa8ueqr erp JoJ tunoJft ol serJl pue uonelnoruJo aJnteu crueufp aqr sazrseqdue >lJo1d tuef,al eJotrAJ 'JeuJEal aqtJo fnsrJetJEJEr{J elq"ls e se uonelrlouJ azr¡entdaruoo or pepual r{fJeasar flrea 'arorurJqunC 'ólunuruoc str pue a8en8ue¡ ra3;er aqr ol uollerualJoJo sadó o¡u esaql uaa.ülag qsn8urrsrp ot rlnJgrp sr lr 'stueluuoJrlue Sulu;ra¡ euros ur'JeAa^\oH '8uru;ea1 a8en8ue¡ puof,as ur ssef,Jns or poteleJ ag ol punoJ uaag a^Er{ uone^noruJo sadlr qroq (snql rorcrpard rauag E eq or punoJ se^\ uollelllour FlueurnJlsur 'rarrarrtoq 'slxaluof auJos uI '8uru;ee¡ InJSSaf,f,nsJo rorrrpard ¡a8uo.rls eql aq ol paJeprsuof se,^a uorlelrloru a,ule¡3atul arurt 8uo¡ ro¿ '(a8en8u"l rarpo ar{tJo sJa>l¿ads grrr'r netuor q8norqr luaurllrrua Iernl e

1nl pue grmor8 ¡euosrad ro3 Sururea¡ a8en8ue¡) uone lloru a,rne¡8elur pu¿ (spo8 ¡ecrrcerd ro atelpaurul rol Sururral aSen8url) uone,rnoru pluerunJlsu¡ sural aql peurof, (Z¿et) urqrue-I

aTEIIB/N pue

raupre) lrago¡ 'uaqr

qtr.&r

]f,Bluof, eJou eJrsaP lllzu laql 'a3en8ue¡ er{rJo sJe>leads arp spre,,vtol sePnlrue elgEJno^EJ e^Er{ sreuree¡ jr 'l1re¡ulS 'u ur lcualcgord errnbx ot pale^noru aq or lla1l aroJeraqt are pu¿ aSenSue¡ puores arpJo enlel alnerrununuor agt a,uar;ad ¡rrvr lagr 'suonrgru? ¡euorssajord HInJ ot Jo suollBnlrs lBrfosJo a8ue; aprr'r e ul e3¿n8uel puofes er¡r >1eads 01 paeu sJauJeol JI 'ltrunuruoc aSen8uel puofes eqt spJpaor sepnrrut rrar¡l 'raqlo eqt uo pue 'spaeu elrluf -runuJurof, (s.rauJEal 'puEr{ auo eqt uo :srolJej o,^atJo suJJal ur peuyep ueaq tI 'uouaruouagd xa¡druor e sr Sulu¡ea¡ a8enSue¡ puof,es ur uone rlory ser{

'Sururea¡

daa>1

or ssau8ul¡lr'l e qtl^\ parerf,osse

eJE sepnlntB a,r.llrsod lErp afuePr^a eldrue sr eJar{r '8uru.rea¡ ur ssarf,ns asnBf sePnlrDE a,rrlrsod rerp a,rord louuEf r{sJEeseJ arp gSnoqr¡y'sJolJEJ raqro lq parla5¿ erc qtog Jer{req.^a Jo 'sapnrlue a,ulsod srapua8ua Suturea¡ InJssaffns ro Sururea¡ InJssef,f,ns arnpord seprunle a,rrlrsod Jer{reqa auruJetep ol ls¿e lou sl tr 'selgeuel rarpo qrr^\ asm ar{t sl sV'(€002 JauprED pue ra-ro8se¡n¡) Sulu;ra1 a8en8uel puofas ur ssef,Jns pue 'firunruluof, slr pur e8enSue¡ eql pJe,ry\ol sepntnle s JeuJEal p uea,4 teq drqsuorre¡a.r Jr{r uo u8laro3 Jo puooas auue¡8o¡d e }no perJJEf a,rer¡ san8ea¡lof srr{ pue JeupJEO ueqo¡

r{f,JeesaJJo

uotlpa4out ?u3 Sututaal a8anSuq puotas ut satuataftp

srywglv

pnplalpul

88

Indiuidual dffirences in

second language learning

conversation course she is taking, and his 'choice motivation' is activated again. He decides to register in the conversation course and in just a few weeks he develops some basic Spanish conyersational skills and a feeling of accomplishment. His satisfaction level is so positive (motivation retrospection) that he decides to enrol in a more advanced Spanish course when he returns from his trip to Spain. In a book devoted to helping second language teachers generate and maintain learners' motivation, Dórnyei (2001b) proposes and describes concrete and innovative methods and techniques that can help teachers motivate learners throughout these three phases.

Motiuation tn tbe classroom In a teacher's mind, motivated students

are usually those who participate actively in class, express interest in the subject matter, and study a great deal Teachers also have more influence on these behaviours and the motivation they represent than on students' reasons for studying the second language or their attitudes toward the language and its speakers. Teachers can make a positive contribution to students'motivation to learn ifclassrooms are places that students enjoy coming to because the content is interesting and relevant to their age and level of abiliry the learning goals are challengingyet manageable and clear, and the atmosphere is supportive. Teachers must also keep in mind that cultural and age differences will determine the most appropriate ways for them to motivate students.

Little research has investigated how pedagogy interacts directly with motivation in second/foreign language classrooms. One exception is a stud,v by Marie Guilloteaux and Zoltán Dórnyei (2008) who explored the links between teachers' motivational practice and students' motivation for L2 learning. It was a large-scale study with 27 rcachers and over 1 ,300 learners in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classrooms in Korea. The teachers' motivational strategies were described using a classroom observation scheme-the Motivation Orientation of Language Teaching (MOLT). MOLI identified 25 motivational practices used by the teachers that relatively easy to define and to observe. They were divided into four categories that are described below along with examples of the motivational behaviours included within each. Teacher discourse: arousing curiosity or attention, promoting autonom)',

stating communicative purpose/utiliry of activiry 2 Participation structure: group work/pair work 3 Activity design: individual competition, team competition, intellectual challenge, tangible task product Encouraging positive retrospectiye self-evaluation and activity design: effective praise, elicitation ofself/peer correction session, class applause.

68

sannuepl pau8rsse lplornb

a.la.,'r

laqr reqr pa^resgo (0002) laqoo¿ uaallay

'sass"lr uarre8rapuu¡ unrpau-qsr¡8uE u1 uerpllql tue¡3lu¡u¡t qrrm Suqro¿¡ 'ruooJsselo er{r eprsrno a8en8uel puofas aqt do¡ar'ap ot anunuof, or pue esllo¿¡d or peq farp salllunr¡oddo ar{r pallturl suonrntrs asoql ul sacuar.radxa Jreql 'aouelequl ramod E se,,'r eJer{t L{Jlq \ ul f¡¡ecrdlr ere^\ eseqt pue leads or luelrnleJ ara,la.laqr qrlq \ ul suollenlls 'gslSuE sauo

uJeal or pal¿ noru fU8ry ararrr lpnts Ierf,os are,^a erar{t tele.&\o11 ;ag ul sruedlr¡r.rtd aqr ilV'(Ot ,166t af,rrad uorro¡) ,'Plrold ¡ercos 8u€ueqr aqr or (rrruepr rar{/srq pue] rau;ea1 a8en8uel aqrSo drqsuolteler agr arnrdm. ot (tuauJtsalur, urJet eql sesn aqs 'peelsul '8uturee1 a8en8ue¡ pue 'lrrruapl 'remodSo suoneleJ xa¡druoc aqr arnrdec f¡arenbape rou op uolte^Ilou a,rrlr¡8

-elur Pu¿ lEluaujnJlsur sE qlns sldacuoc terp sanS;e aqs 'EPEuEJ uI ueuro^\ lue¡Slrurul 3o sacuarredxa Suturea¡ a8en8ue¡ el{r Jo lpnts aser ¡eurpnrr8uo¡ E ur parf,allof ErEp ruorS SulalrJq 'af,Jled uolJoN fuuog Jo >lJo,/v\ aqr ruo5 seuroJ sra>¡teds a8tnSuel ta8rer pue sJeuJeal a8en8ue¡ Puofes uea^ taq uoll -f,EJelur r3eJE PIJO/\{ IBrf,os eqr

ul

ra,Lrod

jo

suoIlEIaJ

^\oI{Jo

'sdrqsuorre¡a¡ ¡a,trod pue

a¡durexa pooS

y

srrueufp pr:os

ol J nrsues aJE srlnpe se IIea sE ueJp¡rl3 '8ulureal uI ssef,fns tJaJ¿ teqt salqe -rJE^ eql PuelsJaPun 01 >lees 3,&\ uel{1l\ Pa>loolJe^o Jg louuEs slxaluof, IEIfos

ur tsrxa sa8en8uul trqr rf,¿J agl '8utu.rea¡ a8en8ue¡ Puoras uo sJotf,EJ Flalfos r{Jns jo traJe rf,Exe aqr rclpard or a¡qrssodrul sl tr g8noqt ua g 'a8en8ue¡ &r¡ourur e Surureay sJegruotu dno¡8 ll:oleur jo asoql ruo5 uollelltoru Pue sapnlrrre ruaJeglp a,teq leru dno¡8 lrl¡oleru e3o aSen8uel arp 3ururca¡ dnorS ltr¡oulru EJo sJegtueru 'aldurexa rog 'saSenBuEI uee \teq drqsuorre¡a.l ¡a¡'rod aqr sI rolf,eJ l{f,ns auo 'sserrns Sulu;ea1 aSen8ue¡ pue ro rnueulp Frf,os (uoltrlltour rf,eJE osle urc &lunruruo) JaPI^\ eql uI sJollEJ I3l3oS

'sepnuup

aottptl{p

dno¿7

nuqo ?uP ,Qgaap7

' (Z L tgOOZ raluroq pur xnearoilmS),sat8aterts Puollelltrour (sreqf,eal a8en8uelSo pedrur cglrads-ruooJsselo 'ateJJuof al{l Suru¡a¡uo¡ eluaPl^e IEI -r¡rdrua lue, apr,ro;d or,{pnrs rsJg arp sI stqt asnef,ag ruerrodul are s8urpug 'sdrqsuoDelal lfega-esnel atEfIPuI lou oP sllnseJ uollel ar{r 'ssalar{ua,r.a¡ t¿ql a8pa¡mou¡re sJeqfJ¿esal eql 'aJlEuuottsanb eq1 uo srrodar-3¡as

-eJJof,

aql

'sa)I]f,eJd IeuoIlE^Iloru ,sJaurcal aqt pue'srnol,teqaq tuarua8e8ue (sJauJral (sJaq)Eat aqr uaa.&\teq suolrplaJJoJ a,rrtrsod tuerglu8ts PunoJ sJeqf,Jeesal ar{I

'sstll T{E rrarp 01 perelar f¡¡erglcads sle^el uolle^Ilotu rleql lnoqt eJIEuuoIl -sanb r para¡druoc oslr sJaureeT '(sruapnrs el{rJo sPrlqt o^\l uer{l a.rou) q8lq pue (sruapnts eqrJo sprlrll o/v\t ot Prrql auo) mo¡ '(sluapnrs ma3 e) r'ro¡ fra," :uossel pa^Jesgo qf,Ea uI luaruaS¿8ua eJns?auJ ol Pasn sE \ elB)s lo^al-aaJl{r V 'palrln3l¿J se,l\ sellllllf,e Sulrnp PeJeelunlol l¡re8ea oq,/v\ PuE 'paltdtrlued fya,rlrce ogl"r'uonueur pred oq.{\ sruepnrslo uonrodo.rd aql 'ruauaSe8ua;o uI Ia^al JrerFJo suJJal ur PeJns"au sElv\ uoll¿ Iloru (sJJuJEal aql 'uossel r{f,Ba &urutaa1 a&anSuu1 puotas ur satuata¡f1p

pnru(t!?ul

90

Indiuiduatdffirences in

second language

learning I

such as successful/unsuccessful, big/small, talkative/quiet, etc. in their firstl year of school. of course, they also had the identity of 'being ESL. Becausel learners' identities impact on what they can do and how they can participarel in classrooms, this naiurally affects how much they can l."in. Fo, .*"-pl.,l one of the 'ESL children was consistently excluded from imaginative interac| tive activities with her peers; another learner was perceived as someone who I never lisrened or did the 'right thing'. Toohey argues that these identities could eventually lead to their isolation and to restricted or less powerful participation in their classroom communiry. \7hile Toohey is careful to point l out that identities are not sratic and can change over time, it is equally impor- l tant to keep in mind that 'classrooms are organized to provide occasions I upon which some children look more and some less able, and judgem.tttr ".. I made which become social facts about individual children' (Toohey 2000: I ]

I

';'* *rsrudies

above describe how issues of idenriry and investm"n, or"" I important roles for both children and adults when learning a second lan- | guage. Research has also documented how these factors contribute in I complex and sometimes contradictory ways when learning a foreign lan- | guage. For example, it has been observed that Japanese students are often I reluctant to speak English in communicative lessons despite high levels of I motivation to learn the language. Furthermore, when students with high I levels of English language proficiency do communicate they often speak with I a strong Japanese accenr and intentionally produce grammarical errors for I fear that they might be perceived as considering themselves to be superior I

(Greer

2000).

In a study with secondary school Japanese learners of English as a foreig.r language, Yasuyo Tomita (201 1) observed that the students were more willing to communicate during activities that combined a focus on form and meaning than in exclusively meaning-based activities. In observations and interviews with the students, she concluded that learners were nor willing to invest in English communication with each other unless they were able to establish their identities as 'learners' by discussing language form and raising qr.r.rtions about grammar. In exclusively communicative activities learners *.r. reluctant to use English to communicate their ideas or opinions for fear that they would be identified as 'show offs' and pretending to be someone other than

Japanese.

I

| I I I I I

| I

l I

I

Learner

beliefs

i

i

Second language learners are not always aware of their individual cognitive or perceptual learning styles, but virtually all learners, particularly older learners, have strong beliefs and opinions about how their instruction should be delivered. These beliefs are usually based on previous learning experiences

I

]

l

]

I6

'((uoneredard ur) g1g¿ ¿rurT solues pue ryedg) s.,r,rarl.sluep -nts rraqr areqs or papuot lagr reqr pe,/\ .oqs sarpus eqr ur patednrr.red os¡e orl^l sreqreal 'ICE pue 'ISg aqr ruo5 sllnser aql 'ef,n)Erd e,r.lr¿¡runruu¡o¡ r{]r1v\ JEurtuE¡8 Sulle¡8alur roJ efuaJaJard e snqr-uorlsfrunuluoc ro3 ace¡d lpo aqr se uees sr ruooJsself ar{} 'alqelre^E ere Z'I eqt ol aJnsodxa roj sauru -nr¡oddo.&\eJ eJer{^\ te^a \oq 'lxeruoJ -ICE eql uI 'ruooJsself erp ur are laqr uer{^/v\ uoneJrunuruJoo uorj llareredas ¡nuue¡8 uo snco; or llunr¡oddo aqr are¡rardde sraurca¡ 'ruoorssep eql aprslno uoDrfrunruuroo JoJ sarlrun¡ -.loddo aJour oJE oJeql aJaq,r txeluof -ISE aql ur leqt ua,rr8 asuas J nrntur seleur srql 'sJeuJEel -IJE erp uBr{l aJoru qf,nlu uor}fEJalur a DefrunfrrrrroJ ruo5 reruure¡8 Sune¡edas penlr^ laqt reqr pauodar osl? sraur¿al TSE ar{l 1a^a./üoH 'a¡n¡r¡d elrlef,runu¡ruof urr{tr^r, Jruru¡e¡8 ol uorluelle Sune¡8atur parraSard sreurealJo sdno¡8 qroq rrr{t peterrpur stpsar IIEra^o aq1 'acnoerd alnef,runururo3 urr{}r^/( pappaque Jo ruoü l¡are.redas ¡eruru¿¡8 uo snfoJ ol perre3ard lag] reqtaq^\ uaqr 8un1sr 'sJeureel 0E7 or pararsrunupe ara-&\ serreu E sE r.{sr -uonsanb 'a8enSu¿l BI utsreJoJ uB qsl¡8ug pue a8en8uel puoras e sr qsr¡8ug3o (s-raqcear pur) srau;eal qrv!\ sarpnrsJo selros E u1 'rq8ner eq ppor{s tt uaqm rcJ saouara3ard a,reg fagr3l JeI{tEJ rng InJesn sE uoltlnJlsut ¡eurue¡8 a,rta¡¡ad s¡a -urc"I¿aqpqr? lou paultuexa a^¿q GOO) urtat I{rrraser rJr{ PuE epedg eur¡

'qfuaJg pue 'ueru;a5 'gslued5 'a¡drurxe roJ 'ueql ureal ol sra>1eads qs¡¡8ug JoJ rlnlsrp arou snql PuE ueadorng-opul uou a¡e sa8¿n8uel o^u ei{t esnef,eg aq tq8nu slql teill parsa8 -8ns sraqrreasel aql 'qtoq panp otl^\ rIqErV pu¿ asaurl{J 8uturca¡ asoqr roj tdacxa uonf,nJlsur ¡euur¡8 sE I{fnul sE >lleqpaal eAI}feJJo) enle^ rou PIP sJauJeal '¡¡erang 'uonef,lunruulo3 uo snf,oJ aJouJ ro3 lpear PuB lI lnoqe f,IlsE -rsnqtua ssal aJa^\ laqr snqr pue srauJeel aSrn8ue¡ u8raroS oqr or paredruor uonf,nJlsur ¡rruu¡e¡8 snouord jo s¡eaf a¡ou¡ pet{ sJeuJeal TSE aip tBt{t IJEJ arp or par?lar ueaq a^Er{ tg8¡ru s¡q1 'sa8enSue¡ u8rarojSo sraureal plp sE r{f,nru sB tr anle^ tou plp aBEnSuEI puof,as E sr qsr18ug3o srauffel 'alduexa JoJ 'uoll -rnrtsur ¡euru¿¡8 penlel sreureal IIE rou lng auos rerp punoS faql lleqPeaJ e rlreJJoc pue uonf,nJlsur JEuJuJEJB rnoge sJelleq rtagl ssa.rdxa or saSen8uel ruaraglp Jo sreurral gIzL p¿1se (6002) san8ealloo slr{ PuE ua^\aoT u^\eI{S '^\er^ srql paJEr{s sJar{fBel eqrJoJIEq ¡a,ro lsnl',a8en8ue¡

-ua

e er{t or pnuesse sr a8en8ue¡ aqr

rsotu

jo lpnrs

aqr;o Áarseu IEnl

IEruroJ, tEI{r pe^arTag stuePnls

alq \'uorlrPPE uI 'algErISeP sE,&\ slqt rleJ sraqf,ear r'taj,{-ra,r

elll{.,!A Palf,aJ

-Jof sJoJJa Jraqr e^eq 01 eJISep e passardxa stuepnts ¡e f¡pnrrlrr' ter{t PunoJ (t OOZ) zpqls at¿ua¿ sarpnls elrf,s-a8re¡ olu uI 's^\eIA (sJeI{rEe} Pue (stuaPnls r"qr sruJ5uoc Suturea¡ a8en8uel puofes uI I{fJtesad uaa,^ teg r{fterusnu E uauo sI eJeql

>llBqpaa3 J^nJaJJoJ pue Jeuure;83o aloJ aqr rnoge sJaIIag JJuJ?JI uo

'urcal ot ruar{r JoJ sr uonf,nrlsur

fer'r rsag aql aqt Pue

jo adlr rr¡nclued e reqr (8uo.rm ro rq8lr) uoltdrunsse

Sututaal aSan&ual puotas ur satuata¡ftp /an??nlpu]

92

lrudluldual dffirences in second lang,tage learning

Indiüdual differences and classroom instruction There are many questions about how the exisrence of individual differences should infuence instruction. On a simple practical level, it is not possible for a teacher with 50 5¡uds¡¡5-sr even one with 10 students-to customize instruction to suit the abilities or preferences of each one. Neverrheless, there can be little doubt that an instructional approach that rigidly adheres to a single way of teaching all students and an expectation that all srudenrs can learn in the same way will deprive some students of learning opportunities. Zoltán Dórnyei (2005) has reviewed the research on individual differences and proposes a number ofways for educators to help learners make the most of their individual abilities and learning preferences. Learners' instructional preferences, whether due to inherent differences in their approach to learning or to their beliefs about how languages are learned, will influence the kinds of strategies they use in trying to learn new material. Teachers can help learners expand their repertoire oflearning strategies and thus develop greater fexibiliry in their ways of approaching language learning.

Ag. and second language learning 'W'e

now turn to a learner characteristic of a differenr rype: the age at which learning begins. Age is easier to define and measure than personaliry aptitude, or motivation, but the relationship between age and success in second language acquisition is hardly less complex or contror¡ersial.

It

is frequently observed that most children from immigrant families eventually speak the language of their new community with nativelike fluency, while their parents often fall short ofsuch high levels ofproficiency, especially in the spoken language. 'Io be sure, many adult second language learners achieve excellent language skills. One often sees reference to Joseph Conrad, a native speaker of Polish who became a major writer in the English language, and it is not uncommon to find adult second language learners with a rich vocabular¡ sophisticated syntax, and effective pragmatic skills, even though there may be subtle differences between their language use and that of those who began learning the language while very young.

in Chapter 1, the Critical Period Hypothesis is that there is a time in human development when the brain is predisposed for success in language learning. It has been hypothesized that there is a critical period for second language acquisition just as there is for first language acquisition. Developmental changes in the brain, it is argued, affect the nature of language acquisition, and language learning that occurs after the end of the As we saw

g6

¿uonlslnbf,E a8en8uel puolas roj polrad PJITIJO ou sI aJeql leq¡ ueatu slqt saoq 'aBenBuEI puores eql uI aruallerxe eAaII{r¿ oqu, (sr¡npe pue sruacsa¡ope) sJeurcel JaPIo rnoqe satoPf,aue ssallunof aJE eJer{l 'aJotuJeI{lJnC 'af,uaf,selope ul uÉaq oq,/v\ asoqr uEI{t unJ 8uo¡ aqr ut lcuatogo¡d ¡at¿a¡8 o^Jrr{f,¿ slezrr¡r tou op IJ^al loor{fs f¡¿ur¡d re a8en8uel Puof,as e Sulurea¡ ul8ag ogrtr sJauftal 's8uluas Fuonef,npe uI 'uollonJtsul a8¿n8ur1 u8laro3 ro puof,asJo

lsou aqr a>¡eru laqt 'slllls 8ul^los-uelqoJd pue

'sar8are¡ls

l¡oruaru

'a8pa¡ltou1 rnsln8ul¡etaru JIaIp Sulsn lg 'sJeuJeal ¡a8unol ueql luelfga aJour eJE sJauJ?al Jeplo terp u^\oqs elpq saouetsuInf,Jlf, JEIItuls u¡ Suturea¡ sra -u;ea¡ raSunol pue rap¡o3o ruarudo¡a,rap a8en8url Puoles al{rJo solPnts aruos ta^a^\oH '3unol l¡a¡' aJE sJauJeal uagrrr sulSag IIJI Peaons ot l1a>1t¡ tsouJ st uorlfnJlsur a8rn8uel puooes terp Jpnlluoo or stua¡ed lueur sB IIa^\ s¿ sJa>pu frr¡od pur srolernpe aruos pel srq sarrFlSIP (sreureal lFPeJo uollelrasgo eqr uo Paseq r{lrcesa¡ IrurroJur ¡o acua¡¡adxa puosrad or uolllppe ul H¿f, 'a8en8ue¡ ¡aeu eqt asn ot Peeu ¡lu,(agr eJeI{,{, suollenlls uI salles -ruoqt aceld or ssau8ut¡nr pue uolte^Iloru Jleql rcage feru s8uqee3 a,rtle8au rpn5 'ueaur lagr reqr'r l¡rcexa les or 3ur1¡r uI uolteJlsn53o sarualradxe JaUe fcenbaprul30 esues e do¡a,rep,{eru laqr pue a8en8uel el{lJo lrarsetuSo >1oe1 rrar¡r fq passerregrue uauo eJe stppv'seePl Palmr¡duoc arouJo uolssa¡dxe eqr pu" aSenSut¡ xa¡druoo aJou puttuaP r?qt suoll?nlls uI sJllesuaqr Puy or l¡a41 aroul aJB srauJeel raplo 'pardarrr tsBal 13 ro 'pasrerd ua5o Jre slroga rra3radurr l¡rea rraqr 'aJotuJequn¿ 'Suluur8ag lra,r aqr uor3 f¡arrrn3f,e PUE l¡ruang >pads ol a¡nssa¡d 8uo¡ls acuat¡edxa rou op laqr oJaq.&\ sluauIuoJllue ur a8rn8ur¡ aqr esn pue J¿eI{ ot salllunt¡oddo a¡ou a,teq uaryo laql 'aSen8ue¡ Sulurea¡ ol eto ap ol aulll eJou aAEq f¡ensn sluauIuoJllua Sulurea¡ a8en8 -uEI IBruJoJuI uI sreuJral ra8uno¡ 'ruJráJIP lral uatjo are Sutu;ee1 a8enSur¡

JoJ suotrtpuof, al{t 'stsagrodfll Polrad I¿f,IrIrJ ar¡r fq parsaSSns saf,uaJaJ -jrp pcrSo¡orq a¡qrssod or uonIPPE uI 'sreureel a8en8ue¡ Puof,es sE sllnPe put uaJplrqc a¡eduoc ot IFISIP sl 1l 'Z rardeq3 uI /\eES 31r\ sE 'asJnof, JO

*rffJ;H;;:l*:H:fiml

u"r{r rarlr¿e pue teru aarnaue¡.ry\au EJo or lrr¡qr aqt'e¡druexa ro¿ 'Sulurea¡ a8en8ur¡3o sroadse ruaJaJIP or PalEIer 'sporrad IErItIrf, a¡dn¡nu aq leru arelp reql af,uePl^J Pug sreqlo 'JaIIJEa ue e eq plnoJ u rsaSSns sJaI{f,JEasaJ eruos tnq útaqnd PunoJE aJer{d\euros sPua porrad lef,nrr3 al{r rpqt perulelr ueuo lsotu sI lI 'PIIql Sunol eql o1 elqele^E eJe ler{t sarlnedrc ateuul 'rgtcads aJotu eqt se 8ulurca¡ a8en8ue¡ JoJ alllf,aga se lou arc senITIgE Sutu;ea¡ ¡erauaS asalP tBql pan8re sI lI 'uoll¿luJoJul Jo sllplsJo spuDl rer{ro a¡rnbce 01 asn tg8¡ru lagr sauo eurBs ar{l-saltr¡rge 8ul -uJrel Iereue8 a¡oru uo puadap leru s¡au¡eal JePIo 'Jerpe¡ 'PooqP¡¡{l llJee ul uorlrsrnbre e8en8ue¡ puo3as ¡o uorlrsrnbce a8en8ue¡ lsJg or elnqlJluof, ol leru porrad PrIlIrf, pa^arTeq sarnrf,nJrs porSo¡olq el¿uul Jql uo Paseq aq tou

&utu"raa1 a7an&uol

puotas ur satuata[tp

pn?laryul

94

Indiuidual diferences in Tlt e

second language learning

critical p erio d: Mo re th an j ort pronunciation

?

Most studies of the relationship berween age of acquisition and second language development have concluded that older learners rypically have a noticeable 'foreign accenr' in the spoken language. But what about other linguistic features? Is syntax (word order, overall sentence structure) as dependent on age of acquisition morphology?

as

phonological development?

\lhat abour

Mark Patkowski (1980) studied the relationship berween age and the acquisition of features of a second language other than pronunciation. He hypothesized that, even if accenr were ignored, only those who had begun learning their second language before the age of 15 could achieve full, native-like mastery of that language. Patkowski studied 67 highly educated immigrants to the United States. They had started to learn English ar various ages, but all had lived in the United States for more than five years. He compared them to 15 native-born Americans with a similarly high level of education, whose variety of English could be considered the second language speakers' target language. The main question in Patkowskit research was: 'lVill there be a difference between learners who began to learn English before puberry and those who began learning English later?' However, he also compared learners on the basis of other characteristics and experiences that some people have suggested might be as good as age in predicting or explaining a person's success in mastering a second language. For example, he looked at the total amount of time a speaker had been in the United States as well as rhe amount of formal ESL instruction each speaker had had.

A lengthy interview with each person was tape-recorded. Because Patkowski wanted to remove the possibility that the results would be afFected by accent, he transcribed five-minute samples from the interviews and asked trained native-speaker judges to place each transcript on a scale from 0 (no knowledge of English) to 5 (a level of English expected from an educated native speaker).

The findings were quite dramatic. The transcripts of all native speakers and 32 out of 33 second language speakers who had begun learning English before the age of I 5 were rarcd 4+ or 5. The homogeneiry of the pre-puberty learners suggests that, for this group, success in learning a second language was almost inevitable. In contrast, 27 of the 32 post-puberty learners were rated between 3 and 4, but a few learners were rated higher (4+ or 5) and one

at2+.The performance of this group looked like the sort of range one would expect if one were measuring success in learning almost any kind of skill or knowledge: some people did extremelywell; some did poorly; most were in the middle. was rated

96

'ur"al uaJpllgo Sunol le^\ eql tuo{ rueraglp sr rzgr ft,n ¿ ul a8rn8uel ureel leu s¡au¡¿al rlnpe rer¡r slsaqrodlq aqt ruJguoo or ¡¿add¿ s8urpug ase[L 'pooqplq] ul gs¡pug paureel oq./ü asoqr roJ uonelerror r{rns ou se,ry\ eJer{t tala,l\oH 'ssaof,ns qrvv\ pateleJJor oJe-/v\ saJof,s epnlrrde 'st¡npr se qsr¡8ug Sururea¡ ue8aq oqrrr sruednlued ro3 'reqr puno3 pu¿ slsJl apnrrrdr aSen8ue¡ a>ler or sluedrcll¡ed pe>lw eq 'uolrrppe uI lsel tuaruaSpnl eqr uo a:ueruroj;ad pur uorte;Srturur Jo a8r uaaz'rrag drgsuorre¡a.r 8uo¡rs E punoJ oslt eH 'serels perlun aql ot stue¡Sltuur uelre8un¡1 qrr,l Buq.ro,n 'lpnrs pue uosuqof aqr3o uonecqder ¿ tno parrrro (ggg¿) rasfe)aq ueqo¡

rrodrc¡

d¡epvnr eJou parJe^ lsal Jr{t uo arutuuoSrad.ueqr pue l¡rrerror serualues agr a8pnl or l¡a1l ssel are,&\ rare¡ ueSaq oq.&\ asoql '1ser ruauaSpnl aqr uo sarof,s rsag8ry eql pa^err{r¿ ISaIIJBJ ue8aq oq./!\ sJeuJEa-I 'rsel eqr uo ssassns 3o rorrrpard tuecglugls e sE./v\ sarEls Palrun eqr ur P^r.rr? jo a8e leqr PunoJ rrodrvta¡ pue uosugof

'lou eJe,{UIEg '¡ecnruue¡8

a.rarrr

sef,ueluas

er{uoJI?H 'lf,eJJo3 sE^\ ef,ualuas r{f,Ea Jer{req./( al?f,rPur or PEr{ PUE sefueluas peprof,er p.reaq faql 'xetuls pue l8o¡oqdroru gsrr8ugJo salnr ZI petsar rer{l seluetuasJo Jagrunu a3;e1 e3o sruarua8pnl lrr¡errreuruerS a>pru ot pa>lse a¡a¡nr slu¿dnlued agl 'qsl8uE3o sreleads e^nEu 97 p dnofi uosl¡¿druoc e papnlf,ur osp fpnrs aq1 'sreal aa;qr rseel tE ro1 selets palrun eqt ur ueaq peq IIE pue &ls¡a,rrun uerrJeuv uE tE sJagruaru A¡n:e3 Jo sruepnts arar'r ¡¡y'sa8e rurraJlp re qsrpug ureel ol un8ag prq otl^l sra>1eads uearo) pur aseulr{J 97 3o lpnrs ¿ pat3npuof, (ege t) uodrc¡ Essrlg put uosuqof aurlenbref

,&q a nla

uuta ñ to

sa o trynt

uI

'uorlerounuord or l¡uo lldde rou saop uorrelnurl srqt reqr pue a8enSurl puof,as e3o lrarseru e1r-a^rreuJo tuaudola,rap aqt uo srr{ulT Suntas ur JotfEJ lueuodrur uE sr uorlrsrnbcz3o a3¿'ruaruuoJrlua (l¿Jnleu, eqr ul f¡rrerulrd a8en8uel puoras e a.rtnbce ol{,/v\ sJeuJeal JoJ ler{r punoJ pls \o{r¿d

'snq¡ 'plp uolte.r8nurul 3o a8e se ile \ se sse3Jns rclpard rou prp 'a8e tuorS paterrdas uaq./v\ 'uollfnJlsul Jo tunouJ¿ 'llre¡rul5 'a3r rat*a uE lE PaAIJJE osle per{ afuaprsal .re8uo¡ qtr^ asoqr reqr esef, er{r uarJo sE^{ rI laleldoH 'Jor petlun al{l ur af,uaplser ale¡edas or algrssod lllear lou se^\ tI -crpa.rd pooS l1-rrc3 E ag ot perueas saurnauros sarers

jo rp8ual 'a¡duexa ro¿ f¡ara¡durol ueqr

r?qr srorf,eJ rJrllo aqr ol pereler llaso¡c os selr\ a8r reqr rno paurnl uauo rr rnq 'ssofrns Sururea¡ pue sJor3eJ asoqt uee,l\tag drqsuolrelal eruos 'l¡¡ernreu 'serur eJar{L :rralf ssel qf,nru s¿,tt. a¡ntcld agl 'uorlrsrnb¡e a8en8uel puoJes uI ssafons rceg¿ ol rq8noqr aq rq8lru rEI{t srorf,¿J rarflo alp peulrutxa Ils^\o>pe¿ ueqA\ &u1utaal a8an&ual puotas ut sacuata[tp

pnrultryul

96

Indiuidual dffirences in

second language learning

Rate of learning Some research suggests that older learners may have an advantage in terms of the rate oflearning. They appear ro learn faster in the early stages ofsecond

development. In 1978, Catherine Snow and Mariañ HoefnagelHóhle published a study on a group of English speakers who were learning Dutch as a second language while living in the Netherlands. The learneri included children as young as three years old as well as older children, adolescents, and adults. on tests administered when learners had been in the country for less than ayeaf,adolescents were by far the most successful learners. They were ahead of everyone on nearly all of the tests. Furthermore, ir was the adults, not the children, whose scores were second best. In other words, adolescents and adults learned faster than children in the first few months of exposure to Dutch.

lTgy"g.

By the end of the yea¡ the children were catching up, or had surpassed, the adults on several measures. Nevertheless, the adolescents retained the highest levels of performance overall. The fact that the young children were catching up, together with evidence from other studies, suggests that they would probably surpass the older learners if they continued to have adequate opportuniry to use the language. However, this study shows that adults and adolescents can make considerable and rapid progress in their proficiency in a second language in contexts where they use the language in social, personal, professional, or academic interaction. One view of critical period research that has had an important impact on the way we look at studies of language acquisition has been expressed in the work ofVivian Cook (2008). He makes a srrong case for the inappropriateness of using the criterion of indistinguishable from a natiye speaker' as the basis for success in second language acquisition. Indeed, Cook argues that a second language speaker or bilingual person should not be compared to monolingual native speakers because the real goal is 'multicompetence', that is, knowledge of multiple languages that inform and enrich one another. Research on the long-term ourcomes of second language learning as well as the rate of learning at different ages brings us to a question that is probably ofgreatest interesr ro mosr readers ofthis book tü/hat can we conclude about the role of age when learning takes place primarily in an educational setting?

Ag. and second language instruction Many people who have never heard of the critical period hypothesis believe that, in school programmes for second or foreign language teaching, younger is better'. However, both experience and research show that starting early is no guarantee ofsuccess and that older learners can arrain high levels ofproficiency in their second language. In considering the best age at which to begin

L6

ue8aq a8en8url puo3es e se qsr¡8uE uI uoltJnnsul ql¡Il'r re a8e aqr 'srua¡ed ruoü aJnssaJd or Sulpuodsar 'ragan| ur 'e¡dtuexa Jo{ 'uollf,nJtsulJo sJnor{ f¡¡enrce rou leru JarlJEe uollfnJlsul 8un¡¿ls 's8uluas plol eJour fueu ¡etua 'uoruruof,un IIE tE lou sI uoItEntIS sIqI Ieuonef,npa lu¿ru ur 'aJoruJar{lJnC 'pareaddeslp.,(¡ertuassa sluapnrsJo sdno¡8 o^u aql uee./v\tag sorueJeJlp puÉ .Jot¿urruouop uoruruof, Ja^\ol E ot r{f,"al ol pJpuat uortfnJlsulJo sJnol{ IElol reaal per{ per{ oq,&\ stuapnls eqr pue stuepnls uers-l¡rea parue^pe arou aql rFoq P?q oq,^A sreqf,eel'uonfnJlsur snor,ta¡d ou P?I{ PEq oq^r sluaPnrs q}uv\ sass¿lf loor{3s ,ürpuocas ur pace¡d se^leslueql PunoJ seruneuros 'sarutur.lS -ord r.rers-l¡¡ea ur ssa¡3ord epru per{ oq,/v\ sluaprus lpnrs lreupuel $LGI) s,lleisrng erclJ uI'rarlree ulSeq oqzrr esoqt qrl&\ dn qrrec uaryo (¿1 ro'II 'g 1 a8e ]E 'aldruexa .ro3) rarq rJers oq^\ esogl ¡aarrr ,red uollf,nJtsulJo sJnol{ e.,{¡uo aAreJaJ sJauJeal 'sruoolsse¡l a8en8ue¡u8raJoJ pur -puofes tsoru uI

ru.a3

:ate¡ Surqctar a8en8ue¡ u8laroj Jo puof,as ur8ag or luanse aJoru eg leu l 'seAII JralpJo ued lu¿uodrut ue eg ol enurruof, III^\ a8en8ue¡ e^Ileu s,p¡ql eqr reql paurnsse sr tI uaq,t\ Pue 'ruatsls Fuon"Jnpe uE ur sluapnrs IIe JoJ ÁIlq" a lleflunururof, f,Iseq sr po8 eql uat¡,tr\ 'a8en8ue¡ rs.]g Epllql aql Jo tuaurdo¡a,rap ara¡druooul ro ssol eql ¡¡erua leru a8en8ue¡ puof,as ar{r or a¡nsodxa ellsuatul{1tea 'y rardeq3 ur ,ry\ES e¡ sE tale,ry\oH 'a¡qrssod se l¡rea se a8en8ue¡ agr lq pepunorrns l¡ara¡d -ruor ag ot reureel el{t JoJ alqerlsep aq peapul leu r1 'a8en8ue¡ raSrer aqr u¡ lruarcgord aIII-a neu sr Sulurea¡ a8en8ue¡ puores 3o a,trrralqo eqt uaqrk\

'uon?rrunuo.rd

a>1r¡-erttreu

qrl,t\

>¡eads or uer{l JeI{tEJ asJnof fIrueP¿JE uE JoJ stxel PeaJ ol Jo 'suoIl?uIuIEXa (uoltef,IunuruJof feplra,l,a ro3 aSrn8ue¡ agr a8en8ur¡ u8raro3 uo paalons ol asn ot sr ¡eo8 asoq,l.r sreuJeal lueru 3o spaou aql ,fsrres ill^\ arup 3o por.rad rroqs l¡a,r.rrelar E ur a¡lnbce 01 elqe ere srauJeal replo reqt s¡qs puz aSpa flrr¡n:rued uarp¡qr.ra8unof urql

1^lou>I

agl 'Sulurre¡3o

l¡prder a¡ou

sa8ers f¡rea agr ur

ssa.rSord sruacsa¡op¿ pue ueJpllt{r ssesse

pue qeo8 eqt

uI 'tuaudo¡a,rap e8en8ut¡

's8uluas asaqr

rJplo rer{r uaoqs

seq l{f,rBaser

PuoJes JoJ eIqEIIE E saf,Jnosal eql

ot luel¡odrur ll.relnrlr.red sl tt 's8uluas IEuoIlEf,nPa uI

'l:uarogord alll-a^neuJo tuauruletlt elp uo pue a8e uo lpo sasnro3 qJlr{¡a 'slsaqroddq porrad I"f,IlIJr aqr uo I{rJEaseJ uo f¡a¡os paseq aq louurr ulSaq p¡noqs uollrnJtsul ql¡I¡a re a8e agr tnoq¿ suoISIreP 'snql 'Surureel JoJ suolrlpuof ¡e¡cos arer.rdordde agr PuE 'uolle^IlouJ 'ePnl -nde sa,r¡orrur lcuarcgord a8rn8ut¡ puof,as Jo s¡e,ra¡ q8¡g Sutrlcear 'sJeuJBOI raplo ro3 l¡er¡adsa 'teqt uaas osle a^Br{ e/N '3uturea13o a8e qrut parelsosse eJE saruorlno SuruJeel ur saoueJeJlp IEI{I aouaPt,ra Suotls st atagl 'uaas azreg ar*. ry '(¿SOOZ umoqrq8rl) rrers a¡qlssod lsallree aqrSo-ll¡lgerlsap aql ue^a ¡s-Á¡ss333u egt rnoqe suolsnlf,uof, or dunl a/ur aJoJeg sJn3fo U qf,Iri,{\ ul txaluoo erp PuE auue¡8o.ld leuoltfnJtsul ueJo qeo8 aqr rnoqe l¡1ryaJef, 1ulqr ot Ieltuasse sI lI 'uolllnJlsul a8en8uel Puof,Js

Sututaal aBanBuE puocas ur satua"ra¡[ty pn?ruryuJ

9B

Indiuidual diferences in

second knguage learning

in recent years from about age 9 or i0 to age 6, but the total number of hours of instruction was not increased. Rather, the number of minutes of instruction per week was spread over more years (Lightbown,

was lowered

2012). Thus, after years of classes, learners who have had an early start may feel frustrated by the lack of progress, and their motivation to continue may be diminished. Clearly the age at which instruction begins is not the only variable that determines success in the second language classroom. For many years, it was difficult to compare early-start and later-start learners because of all the variations in their educational contexts. Since the 1990s, many more studies have allowed us to investigate this question more effectively. Some large-scale research projects have been particularly useful in separating the effect of age and other factors in school-based foreign language learning. For example, in Spain, the Barcelona Age Factor (BAF) project studied the effects of changing the age of beginning to teach English to Catalan/Spanish bilingual students.

V/hen the starting age for teaching English was lowered, Carmen Mu ñoz and her colleagues took advantage of the opportunity to compare the learning outcomes for students who had started learning at different ages. They were able to look at students' progress after 100, 416, and 726 hours of instruction. Those who had begun to learn later (aged 17,14, or 18+) performed better on nearly every measure than those who had begun earlier (aged B). This was particularly true of measures based on metalinguistic awareness or analytic abiliry. On listening comprehension, younger starters showed some advantages. Muñoz suggests that this may be based on younger learners' use of a more implicit approach to learningwhile older learners' advantages may reflect their ability to use more explicit approaches, based on their greater cognitive maturiry. She points out that, in foreign language instruction, where time is usually limited, younger learners may not have enough time and exposure to benefit fully from the alleged advantages of implicit learning' (Muñoz 2006:33). One of the advantages of the BAF project is that the researchers were able to follow the same learners' language development over several years. This enabled them to examine whether the early learners would eventually surpass the older learners as has been observed in the 'natural' setting. This did not happen-although the younger learners caught up, the older learners maintained their advantage over time. Decisions about when to start second language instruction in schools should be based on realistic goals and on realistic estimates of how long it takes to achieve them. One or two hours a week will not produce advanced second language speakers, no matter how young they were when they began. Older learners may be able to make better use of the limited time they have for second language instruction.

66

.a8rn8ue1

puof,es e Bururea¡ ur In;ssef

-fns aq uEf, ssf,ueJaJerd Sururea¡ pu' sarrrlrq' luaJeJlp r{1r.4 sJeuJ'al 0s senr^r138 leuorlfnJlsulJo lrarre,r apr,r\ E rfr^\ lueuJuoJl^ua Sulurea¡ 'Eq] B alEaJf,

a rlrsues ar{l .JeuJeeJ aqr e ur 'ruoo.rsselc Jo ¡eo8 aSenSue¡ B s¿ ssaf,f,ns JJr{ Jo srr{ af,uangul sflrsuatoeJpr.l3 s pnpnrpur JEI III^\ -nclued E,&oq rrlpa.rd orflnlslP r,tt"*rrJ, rng ,suor:e-rrrl, esaq¡ "r¡d*or Jo JJnrsu aqr aroldxa or Suluursaq aJp sJar{f,J'es'U .seurt ruaJeJrp ]E suorl -lpuoc erues aql or f¡ruaragrp treer ,paepul.suorlrpuor IIr,,!\ raureal etues er{l ,ssa¡agreuoN

o1 sr JJr{f,¿ar

Sururea¡ arues eqt_ot l¡ruaragrp rr"r, sJauJ¿al tuaJaglp p.r" ."r1á-o, ¡r^ aJB stueu¡uo¡lnua Sulu¡eel pue sfnsrJelJeJer{J ueel\teq sdrqsuon lenpr^rpur -EI'J 'uoDrpp' uI Jarpou' auojo ruapuadapur 10u e.r' sfrlsrJarf'rer{r aql leql rlEJ erp o1 pue srnsrralf,ErBqJ lenpr^rpur 8ur¡nsraru pue Sulugap 30 lr¡nr5 -JIp eql or enp l¡rred sl sFlI .la¡d¡atur ol lsea slezvrp ro,, ,i" ,rrurrrgrp I'npr^rpur uo r.lJr'esal Jo srFser ar{t r¿qt peuJEJI a^eq e.&\ tarderlc srql uI

,fteululng ¿suottenlts luaJa#tp ut seulof,tno luaJe#tp parueuadxa arreq lq8rtu slenpt^tput eqr r€L{r )utqr nol oq g

ot enp aJe euof,tno

)ool

3u!u.¡eal ar{r

qltq^

¿slenpt^tput aql ut luaJequt sef,uaJa#tp ur saJueJa#rp aql

lulLl¡ nol op luetxe leq^

oL

¿sauo)tno aql Jo, a¡qrsuodsal are are¡d ur s¡xetuof,

aqt ¡€r{¡ ¿u¡qr nol op }ua¡xe reLl/v\ oI qrq6

¿suoneDedxa asoql e8ua¡¡eqr ol uaes seuo ¿3uru.rea¡ e8enSue¡

puof,es ut-tt,o )lel

€ Z

eq¡ Jo-ssof,f,ns ql!/v\ poleooss?

erp leqt selqetJe^ eql moqe suollel¡adxa

lnol ulguor

sese)

q)tr.l^\ |

'spuatJl pue sanSea¡¡or lnol¡o t€r]l pu€ e¡uar.¡adxa Sutulee¡ a8en8ue¡ "rnol lnoqe l.€ alq€f ul eper.u nol salou eqt re )rpq )oo-l

sse))ns tululee¡ etentue¡ pue sofuero#lp |Enp!^!pu! uo ltoBeu ,l'rros ,¡euos.red3o

,l.rt^trcv

;','rtl'# ilf

lrrrr,A e ur sa8en8uey rreql esn nro./$, pu' lueru reqr pu' ssaf,rns Jo la^el rsaq8rq aqr a^erqf,e op sreur¿al raplo a.,,os lEql sa^IesJno pullueJ ol lu¿uodrul sr t1 'Surureal ur sssJfns Fnluo^a pue 8ur -uJEell_o erEr {poq lfeJE r3q1 srolfeJ rueuodru¡ osp are Suluma¡ aSenSue¡ roj apntrrde ur sefueJaglp pnphrpur pue .uJeal ol uone^nou eql ,(ruoorsselo aqr eprsrno pue aplsul qroq) Surureel roJ sanlunt¡oddo eql .Burureal regr Jo ssesf,ns l¿nlu3^e eql pue 8uru.ree1 a8en8uel puofes sarpeo.rdde pnphrpur u¿ rpq^\ ur fe¡r. aql eurr.uJalep reql $rlsrralf,BJer{l er{l Jo auo ljuo't, ,3y &ututaal a&anSuol puotas ut satuata¡ftp

pnplal7ul

100

Indiuidual dffirences in

second language learning

Questions for reflection

I

Think of an example of a member of a majority group learning the language of a minority group and one of a member of a minority group learning a majority group's language. How might the power relationships between groups of speakers affect the attitudes of language learners? How might the status of the languages affect opportunities for learning?

2

As a second/foreign language teacher or learner,what are your views about teaching grammar? Do you have any specific preferences for how it should be taught or when? Do you know what your students' preferences might be for grammar teaching. lf not, do you think it would be useful to find out?

3 lf you were teaching English as a foreign language in a country

with limited

opportunities for secondary and post-secondary education in English, what recommendations would you make regarding the age at which English instruction would begin? What research would you draw on in supporting

your recommendations?

Suggestions for further reading Dórnyei, 2.2005. The Psychohgy of the Language Learner: Indiuidual Dffirences in Second LanguageAcquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates. Dórnyei reviews decades of research on how individual differences affect second language learning. The book covers personalityvariables, aptitude, motivation, learning sryles, learning strategies, and other individual characteristics such as anxiety and willingness to communicate that may vary according to the learning environment. Both thorough and accessible, this review concludes by emphasizing the evidence that individual differences are strongly affected by the situation in which learning takes place rather than being'context-independent and absolute.' Muñoz, C. (ed.). 2006. Age and the Rate of Foreign Language Learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. The Barcelona Age Factor study is the basis of this edited volume. Ten chapters report on various aspects of students' learning of English, comparing the outcomes for students whose foreign language instruction began at different ages. In addition to the specific research reports on, for example, the students' oral fluenry, vocabular¡ and rate of learning, there is an overview chapter in which Carmen Muñoz, the project director and editor of the volume, discusses the project in terms of broader issues of age and language learning at school.

IOI

'Sulurea¡ Z'I perJnJrsur snsJal IEJnlEuJo sarprus pu? uonfnJlsurJo sadlr ruaraglp or uorrelal ur selgErJEA rau;ea¡ SururuJexe sarpnrs lroreroqe¡ pue ruooJSSEIf, sepnlfur srgl 'SurureelZ-Itc¿üa ol lxJluoJ Sulureal JEInf,rl -;ed e qrvrn rf,EJerur selqerJe JauJEJI lenpr^rpur,&\oq Sunr8nsa,rul qf,JeesaJ

segrJcsep uortf,es puof,as agt ur rardeqr r{)BE 'uonoura pue 'ltarxue 'uorl -e^rtour 'apniltde or PelBIeJ {Jo-ry\ IEfrleJoaql uo snfoJ uonf,es 1sJ5 aqr ur s.rardeq: eql 'sualuoc Suru;ra1 put srusrJetreJer{3 raureel lrnpl^¡pul uee \teg suonssJelur uo snf,oJ uortfallof PerrPe srqr 01 sJotngrJtuof, aql 'sururefuag uqof :urpranruy'8utu.taa7 '(pr) U .uosurgo¿ a8an&uaT pattn"¿$ul ?up saruata[rq pnpta?pul '7,007,

Sututoal a8anSual puocas ut sacuata¡{tp

pnruaryul

pesn llepr,&\Jo ruaudole^ap eqr ur lpf,errp tlg sE,/!\ aruangur rrer.Ll .a^'reds -red srgr 3o sruauodo¡d o¡u ann $r96y) ope-I ueqo¡ pue (096I) s>loorg

t^otlt_N 's0/-61aqr 01 s076I eql ruo5 'Eruaurv r{uoN ur f¡ercadsa ,Surgcear a8enSue¡ uSraro3 pue puof,as uo esuangur pjiaz*od ¿ peq rusunor^Eqeg

uotlvztloutau¿ Fu? hcptl¡1y :saouprtlddp a&pnsupl ?uoras 'suslunr{

JoJ

aluEs eql aq 01 pezsaqrodlq se,ryl ssaco¡d SuruJeel eql rnq ,sprurue,(ror"toq"¡ ,fioagr lsrJnor^Er{ag urqrl,r\ q)JEeseJ l¡.rea agr jo r{f,nw .uon

r{11&\

auop

serur.

-EruJoJ rrqBr{ puE '(ssaoons uo >lfEqpaaj ro) tuaurac;ojura¡ ,acllce¡d ,uollsllrur

Jo suJel ul Suru;ea¡ paure¡dxa lroaqr lsrJnor^Eqeg ;1 -rardrq3 ur

,ryr's e¡a

s\y'.

e lpeds¡ad lsr¡nol,wqeq eql 'lxatuof pnos re8.re1 e ur uollrslnbce a8enSurl puoras sare¡d reqr a,rnrads;ad e ,lroaqr p.r.rproiros tE >lool III \ arvr'l¡eurg 'uonBtuJoJur sa erJreJ pue 'sazruesJo .surcleJ ,sa,Lla¡¡ad p"t- rqt

le-vr aqr azrseqdrua sarJoeql asaql 'sreal ruafal ur r{f,J'aseJ a8en8ue¡ puofes paurJojur llSulsea;cur J^Er{ rer{r l8o¡oqrlsd a,rnruSoc ruo{ sJrJoer{l au¡os tE lool oslE IIr^r e/xt 'uorlrsrnbce aSenSuel puof,as roJ lunoffp 01 pepuerxe ueeq e^Eq 1 rardeg3 ur a1rr' ter{l uoursrnb¡¿ a8en8ue¡ lsJg JoJ suoneu ^\ES .rr-orrndBuruJpel -e1dxa rsrleuul pue rsrJnorler{eg eqr ,llor{ rB {ool IIp\ e/N IEug puE ssa¡8o¡d ¡eruarudo¡a,rap a3rn3ur1 puores roJ lunoff,E o1 paJaJo ueag e Eq lBr{l ssrJoaqr eql Jo eruos surtrrExe e1v\ rardrgr srqr uI .slxeluof 1o fial.re,r E ur srnsrJerf,¿JBqJ Jo óel¡¿,r. E r{rL!\ sJauJeal lq uorrrslnbre a8en8 -uEI JoJ tunorre ot speau uonlslnbr¿ a8en8ue¡ puof,as3o lroagt ¡eraua8 y

^.eI

eJd

DNINUVE] EDVNDNV-I CINOf,flS DNINIV]dXE

t04

Exp laining second language learning

audiolingual teaching materials and in teacher training. Classroom activities emphasized mimicry and memorization, and students learned dialogues and sentence patterns by heart. Because language development was viewed as the formation of habits, it was assumed that a person learning a second language

would start offwith the habits formed in the first language and that these habits would interfere with the new ones needed for the second language. Thus, behaviourism was often linked to the contrastive analysis hypothesis. However, as we saw in Chapter 2, researchers found that many of the errors learners make are not predictable on the basis of their first language, nor do they always make the errors that would be predicted by a simple comparison oftheir first and second languages. This discovery led to the rejection ofboth the contrastive analysis hypothesis and behaviourism, leading to a period during which both the role of the first language and the role of practice in learning a second language received limited attention in both research and pedagogy.

In Chapter 2, we saw ample evidence that second language learners draw on what they already know-including previously learned languages. However, we also saw that they are sometimes reluctant to transfer certain first language patterns, even when the translation equivalent would be correct. And we saw

ihat first language infuence may become more aPparent as more is learned about the second language, leading learners to see similarities that they had not perceived at an earlier stage. All this suggests that the infuence of the learnert first language may not simply be a matter of habits, but a more subtle and complex process of identifying points of similariry, weighing the evidence in support of some particUlar feature, and even refecting (though not necessarily consciously) about whether a certain feature seems to 'belong' in the target language. By the 1970s, many researchers were convinced that behaviourism and the contrastive analysis hypothesis were inadequate explanations for second language acquisition. As we shall see, however, as research on second language á.q,rirition has evolved, the explanations offered by behaviourism and the contrastive analysis hypothesis have been revisited and understood in terms of new learning theories.

The innatist perspective we saw in Chapter 1, the rejection of behaviourism as an explanation for first language acquisition was partly triggered by Chomsky's critique of it. Chomsky argued that innate knowledge of the principles of Universal Grammar permits all children to acquire the language of their environment during a critical period of their development. \X/hile Chomsky did not make specifrc claims about the implications of his theory for second language learning, Lydia \X/hite (2003) and other linguists have argued that Universal

fu

EOI

8uil1rapun aouaradruo¡ aqr selquesal a8en8url puof,as er{Uo esn aqr serTJepun

tegt acuatadruof, ar{r Jer.parÍ\\ ur pelsaJalul a.re laql 'sJauJBal Suruurseq 3o a8en8ur¡ aldrurs aql ur u'r{r rar{r'r-r,ruruerS xaldruor 3o a8palz*o'I rraql 3o acuaradruor a3en3ue1 aql uI pelseJalur l¡ensn arr pE

-sJerTJEal-pafuB a,tlpads-lad on B ruo5 uorllslnbre a8enSuel puofas

lpnrs oqn

sJar{f,Jtasau

'sarnlBal aSen8uel r{rns uo lleqpeeJ pue uon)nJrsur

, e-^a (te pue g salpnrg) 9 ratdeq3 u1 Jo rraJa aqt uo rlrreeser eruos eas 1 ill^\ 'sra4eads gruarc lq parnpord sacualuas ur sqra^p' qsq8ug 3o l.'-ri"1á aqr3o lpnrs serrrl6 u,r srqrJo aldurexa poo8 e./v\Es a1ü .¿ rardeq3 uI .tou op laqr 'rcej ur 'uaqrvl a8en8uel puocos eqr ur sruap,unba a,t"q já"du'I rsrg er{r Jo seJnlf,nJls auos leql erunssE feru laqr (esr.&ueq}o .a3en8ue¡ puof,es 3r{l ul ImnEuru¿¡8 lou sr lBr{ \ lnoqE uorleu;o3ur rl]rTdxa peJu saurrlauJos leu s¡au¡ea¡ a8en8ue¡ puores'a8enSue¡ er{rJo rsJg uolusrnbce aqr rq parerl' ,regr rsaSSns os¡e laqr ta,rarvrolq 'a8en8ue¡ aqr DOJo arnteu ar{l JSnE3aq

sl

Jo esn ¡nSSuluearu ur pa8e8ua are sraurpal uaqm llprnreu aceld rrr1"l rá"n'B -uEI ,\\au eql Jo saJnleej ¡rcrteruure;8 lueu 3o uorlrslnb¡e reqr aarSe sJer{lo puE (I66I) ellqrt\ ep/1 .a8en8ml ar{rJo ernlrnJts Surl¡rapun aqlJo uop -lsrnbce agr .ra38rrr ot luarf,gns sl a8enSuel terpJo s.ra>1eads r{tr^\ uonf,EJetuJ 'lueuJuoJr^ua sJauJeal aqr ur aSenSuel IEJnlEuJo Ál1lqe1re,re aqr uo pesEg sr

uonrsrnb:e a8en8uel regt san8rc aqg .aBenSuEI ,ryreu er{r Jo a8palzrroul crre -ruatsls Surl¡rapun eql rf,aJE rou op pue arueurojrad a8en8url ¡[o srcadse a8uegr ll?qpaal puB uoDrnrtsur leql sepnlf,uor .alduexa

¡elrg:adns

lluo

roJ'(€66I) zu¿^il{3s aruuog .a3en3ue1 puof,es ar{rJo a3pa1.,r,rou1 (sreurEsl >flEqpaal Jo lrr¡qe1re,re eqr Jo uorlfnrlsur tf,eJe llrlv\ IEtuJoJ ,r\oq lnoqe sese rrar{l ur raJrp oslu >lro,&etup{ Dn ar{l urqtl/v\ 8uqro,l.r. sJer{f,reese¡

-podlq

'sa8en8ue¡ Jer{loJo uortrsrnbre aqr lq paratle uaog ser{ eJnleu lfexa slr rEr{l }ng 'sJeuJBal aSenSue¡ puoJes or 3lgelrc^B pue ruesa.rd aq leru lBr{t an8re sragrc) 'uolllslnbce a8en8uel puof,as puE tsJg ur eurEs ar{r aJE

Dn

OnJo lrrlrge¡e,re puE aJnleu erp ter{r rurEIJ./\4,er^ srqr ploq oq,&\ slsrroer{r eqt Jo eiuos 'sJauJEal a8en8ue¡ tsJg ot se ila,/v\ s3 sJeuJ¿el a8en8ue¡ puo)es ol alqB -lleñ aq rsntu DnJo a8pa¡r*orq ler{l sr uorrecr¡drur aql .or pesodxa ere laqr rndul eqr un llarnua puedap ot peq feqr 3¡ peurrel a,teq l¡geuosear plnof, lar¡r uegr a8en8ue¡ aqr lnog' aroru moul llpnrue^a sreur'al reqr rlEJ er{r roJ uorteue¡dxa up paau e./v\ ,sr lEr{I .uorllslnb¡e a8en8uel puo3as 1o ,.ua1qorá ¡ecr8o¡ aql, ilrls sr erer{l rBr{r rno lulod s;aqro pue (€002) loo3 uer^rl ?t\oleq pegulssp ssuoer{r pclSo¡oqolsd ¡e.raua8 erolu arpJo auo sdeqrad peuleldxe aq ol seq uonrsnbce a8en8ue¡ puooes reqr

'l.roeqr Jar{to auos

lq

llpn

sutaru srql 'aer^ rreqr u1 'pol.rad Ipf,rlrrr agr passed a,req or{,4 sraurea¡ lq -adsa 'eSenBuEI puofas ¿Jo uorlrsrnbce aqr JoJ uoneueldxa poo8 E JeJo

tou

saop lr 'uorllsrnbc¿ a8en8ue¡ rs.rg SurpuersJapun JoJ lJod\aruerj arerrdo;dde q8nogr¡e ,reqr parsaSSns azreq (9661) rerr{rerps ullanbref

ue aq leru

3¡

pu¿ (066I) ueruo-r¡-fa¡g ueqo¡ a¡druexa ro3 (srar{ro .uolllsmb¡e a8en8 -uEI Puof,as puelsJepun o1 r{Jrrl^\ uro.I3 a,urads.rad rseq 3rF sJeJo JptutuEJS &urutua1 a&an&ual puotas 7ururuldxE

r06

Exp

kining

secorud language

learning

the language performance of native speakers. Thus, their investigations often involve grammaticality judgement or other methods to probe what know about the language rather than observations ofnatural language use.

Second langaage app lications : Kras lten's

'Monitor Mod¿l' Perhaps the best known model of second language acquisition infuenced by

Chomskyt theory of first language acquisition is Stephen IGashent (1982) Monitor Model, first described in the early 7970s, at a time when there was growing dissatisfaction with language teaching methods based on behaviourism. Krashen described his model in terms of five hypotheses.

Inthe acquisitionl learninghypothesis, Krashen suggests that we 'acquire' language as we are exposed to samples of language that we understand in much the same way that children pick up their first language-with no conscious attention to language form. \We 'learn' on the other hand through conscious attention to form and rule learning. In Krashent view, far more language is acquired than learned.

Next, according to the monitor hypothesis, second language users draw on what they have acquired when they engage in spontaneous communication. They may use rules and patterns that have 6een learned as an editor or 'monitor', allowing them to make minor changes and polish what the acquired system has produced. Such monitoring takes place only when the speaker/writer has plenry of time, is concerned about producing correct language, and has learned the relevant rules. The natural orderhypothesis was based on the finding that, as in first language acquisition, second language acquisition unfolds in predictable sequences, as we saw in Chapter 2.The language rules that are easiest to state (and thus to learn) are not necessarily the first to be acquired.

The comprehensible input hypothesis is that acquisition occurs when one is exposed to language that is comprehensible and contains i + I .The'i' represents the level of language akeady acquired, and the'+f is a metaphor for language (words, grammatical forms, aspects of pronunciation) that is just a step beyond that level. Krashen's ffiuiue fber hypothesis is proposed to account for the fact that some people who are exposed to large quantities of comprehensible input do not necessarily acquire language successfully. The 'affective filter' is a metaphorical barrier that prevents learners from acquiring language even when appropriate input is available. Afect rcfers to feelings of anxiety or negative attitudes that, as we saw in Chapter 3, may be associated with poor learning outcomes. A learner who is tense, anxious, or bored may fber oulinput,

making it unavailable for acquisition.

LOI

¿os aq

rq8ru slqr lq^

suosper eruos Jo

)ulqr nol u€J

I

'Surqreat e8en8ue¡ Puof,as ul lelluanUul Peul?uel aAeq s/v\alA EuaqsEJ) 'sseleqilaAaN'salPnls l€lrJrdua ur saseqlod,(q a^U aqr lset ol flnlu$tp st lt leqt stsEq eqt uo ll!€d

'lapo¡ Joiluoh quaqseJ) ro lllprle^ aqt pauotlsenb elpq sJaltJ^ ,o

lepol^l Jolluol,^l eql 'os aq

autuexf

Jeqrunu V

Art^trcv

leru srqr lqr* ure¡dxa or dleq l8o¡or¡clsd a¡rtruSo¡ ur prdola^rp

sarJoJrll Suru;ea1 ruorS srq8rsur auos 'uonf,nJtsur paprn8 ot ssef,l¿ aAEr{ oslB ssa¡un a8enSue¡ puof,as eqr Jo saJnreal eruos uo ssa¡8o¡d JequnJ e>ltru

laqr or

1rr3

laqr qrrq.^a ruo5 turod e qcear

leu

sluapnls ler{} le^e

^.oq

'u./v\oqs os[E

a^Er{ serpnts 'uonf,nJtsur DeJrp lnoql.u lndur a¡q¡suaqarduor ol a¡nsodxa q8no;gr ssarSordSo pap rea;8 e aletu uer sluapnts ]eqt parurguor seq r{f,reesar ruooJSsEIJ 'uonrsrnbf,E a8en8ue¡ puooas ur qJJEeseJ.roJ sueprJo afJnos e uaeq

e Eq 'srsaqtodlg tndur algrsuar¡ardruor ar{l l¡plradsa 'sasar¡rodfg s,uaqsrr) 'paruarualdrur l¡apr,l uaaq seq 'Surgrear a8rnSue¡ pasBg->lsel pue 'pJseq-tuJt -uo: I lll asn ol lrlllq" er{r ro 'a8pa¡,rtou1 lurnpef, -ord aruooaq leu a8palmoul a^nerelf,ap'acrrorrd q8norgr 'trr¡l sr srsagrodlg ar{I 'elnJ ¡trurue¡8 e 'a¡druexa to3 '8uv'eq Jo eJ¿,tre aJE e^\ rrr¡r a8palmourl 'sr teqt 'a8pa¡r'lou1 a lleJelf,ap r{lr1rt stJels 'Sururea¡ a8en8ue¡ Surpn¡cul '8ur -ureal tsoru regr rsaSSns laql ',Sulureel IIDIS, se uonlsrnb¡t aSrn8ue¡ puoras pareSnsa,rur e er{ srerpo pue (L007,'IO0Z'966I) raslayaq uaqo¡ 'lro1d G6GD suosrepuv 'U 'I uo Sulz*erq 'sJeqf,reasal lueu lq paro¡dxa uaaq eler{ uonrsrnbce aBrnBuEI puolas ot saqcro;dde Sulssacord uonrru;o3u1

'euJn auo le ul a8e8ua uEf, e,4i\ lr¡,rrrre lelueru pesnloJJo tunoruB arlt or trurl E sr aJaql regr srsaSSns Iepotu Sulssaco¡d uoneuroJur a{L 'rl puagardruoc f¡ry op l¡enrua,r.a faqr3l ua.ta 'lxat E puetsJapun ot aurrl aJouJ pJau sJepEaJ a8en8uq puocas lqr'r urc¡dxa ot sd¡aq Sulueaur ot sseJJE Jneruotne Jo lJel aql 'rueql uaa.&\tag sdrqsuolre¡ar erp pue spro.,'l' Fnpr^rpur 3o Suluearu aql Sulssaco¡d uo uonuauB rraql Jo aJoru esn sJauJeal tuarcgord ssal seaJer{.&\'uoDes¡eluor Jo rxet r3o Suruearu IpJe^o eqr ot uonuene IInJ rraqr a,l.l8 ue¡ s¡asn a8en8ue¡ ruarcgo.rd 'sngl 'uoneurJoJul ¡*au Sulssaco;d ro; papeau sa)Jnosal Jo pupl agr dn esn lou op sasuodsal Jnrurotnr r{lns 'rr puelsJapun rnq d¡aq touue) lagl 'puoras

r{ds e JoJ ua^a 'pJo1v\ JBrlruEJ E JEer{ sJeuetsrl rualrgord ueqAys8urueau pJo,/úJo I"AarJleJ aql sr Surssaco¡d e8en8uel ur llorteuolneJo rcadse raqrouy .(SOOZ

preuley¡¡

pue (ql¿l¡-uosdrulg 'sr¡E) a.rua8 cglcads e ul e8en8uel uanrr^\ pue a8en8ue¡ IeuorlesJa^uol r{Jnru ol oslt lnq 'suolssa.rdxa rneruorpr or l¡uo rou sar¡dde suraued jo esn srql'raqraSor rncco l¡ecldlr ]Erp spro^\Jo s8ur¡rs Sursn lq lq sacuetuas ¡aeu aleeJr rou op s.raleads Jar{l¿J tng aurn ¿ te pJoA\ euo Sursoor¡:

rueng 'sr lEr{I 'f,relnuroJ f¡r.red rsEal le JrE reql a8en8ue¡3o su¡erl¿d alqerf,rp -ard ruo.r3 ur'reJp sr les sraleads aseql rer.{,&Jo r{f,nru 'aJoruJaqunC 'f,neruolne l¡eltuassa sr sJa>fJEru porteruruerS are¡.rdo.rdde eq] qrv!\ .raqraSor uagr 8ul -8ur¡ls pue 'rueql Surcunouo.¡d 'spror'r Sursoogc 'sra>leads ruatcgo.ld ;o¿ aSen8ue¡

'f,lteruolnr auof,aq l¡¡enprr8 'uJnt ur 'tBr{l agrjo snadse raqto efnou ol sa:¡nosa.r Surssaco¡d a¡.rlru8oc dn saar3

&ulutaa1 aSan&ual puotas &uturu1 dxE

110

Exp laining second knguage learning

Sometimes changes in language behaviour do not seem to be explainable in terms of a gradual build-up of fluenry through practice. These changes have been described in rerms of restrucruring (Mclaughlin i990). They seem to be based on some qualitative change in the learner's knowledge. Restructuring may account for what appear to be bursts of progress, when learners suddenly seem to 'put it all together', even though they have not had any new instruction or apparently relevant exposure to the language. It may also explain apparent backsliding, when a systematic aspecr of a learner's language incorporates too much or incorporates the wrong things. For example, as we saw in Chapter 2, when a learner finally masrers the use of the regular -ed endingto show past tense, irregular verbs that had previously been used correctly may be affected. Thus, after months of saying 'I saw a film', the learner may say'I seed' or even 'I sawed'. Such overgeneralization errors are not based on practice of those specific items but rather on their integration into a general pattern.

Another concept from psychology offers insight into how learners store and retrieve language. According to transfer-appropriate processing (TAP), information is best retrieved in situations that are similar to those in which it was acquired (Lightbown 2008b). This is because when we learn something our memories also record aspects of the context in which it was learned and even the cognitive processes involved in the way we learned it, for example, by reading or hearing it. To date, most of the research on transfer-appropriate processing has been done in laboratory experiments, for example, comparing the learning ofword lists under different conditions. However, the hypothesis seems to offer a plausible way of explaining a widely observed phenomenon in second language learning: knowledge that is acquired mainly in rule learning or drill activities may be easier to access on tests that resemble the learning activities than in communicative situations. On the other hand, if learners'

attention is drawn to grammatical forms during communicative activities in which their cognitive resources are occupied with a focus on meaning, the retrieval of those forms on a grammar test may be more difficult. In Chapter 6, a classroom investigation of L2learning influenced by transferappropriate processing is described in Study 40.

Uage-based learning As seen in the discussion of first language acquisition in Chapter 1, cognitive psychologists, unlike innatists, s€e no need to hypothesize the existence of a neurological module dedicated exclusively to language acquisition. They argue that what is innate is simply the ability to learn, rather than any specific linguistic principles. Some usage-based theories also attribute less importance to the kind of declarative knowledge that characterizes skill learning and traditional structure-based approaches to second language instruction. As Nick Ellis (2002) explains, the emphasis is on the frequency with which

TII

uo Sursnf,oJ 'xoq lun e gsnd ¡1op loq e Surleru lq rno lr ltrE IIr^\ lagr ,loq qsnd xog, sE r{3ns spJo^\Jo 8ul¡ls e rraq laqrJI'snr r.'sef,uetuas ppo rard -rJlur ot plJo,&\ eqr ur >lro1( s8urqr len agt jo a8pa¡mou1 rraqr pue l¡erurue Jo san3 asn l¡¡ensn uer uarpllqr Sunpads-qsl¡8ug p¡o real-ae;gr pup -o1{ 'rrefqo eqr uaqr'qJa eql uarll 'tsrg rralgns eql suorluau aruatuas gsrpuE pcrdlr aq] 'sr tEqL '(O S) ralqg -qra¡-roalqns JapJo er{l a^Eq saf,uelues qsllSug tsory 'srueuoduoc ef,ueluas uae,{ueg sdlqsuonelal aqrJo Jorrf,rpur uoururof, lsou eql s¿ JapJo pJo,tr sasn qsr¡3ug ¿Surueau eqt tno arn8g nof sdlaq req¿6'snorlqo l¡arerparuul rou sI af,ualuas e 3o Sulueau eqr eJeqa uonentrs e ur Jealf seruof,eq srql 'r{rea jo lrerurrd eqr ur JeJrp lagr rnq 'sano a¡dn¡nuJo esn a>pru saBenBuBI tso4 'Jcuatuas or{l ur sunou agr;o lrerurue er.lt pue (sJa>lJeru ¡erlreruuetS tap:o p.roll, lq pa¡eu8ls aq leu erualues E ur spro^/d uae uaq drqsuonela.r aqr 'aldruexa JoC 'suonlun; oylcads pu8ls rerp (senf,, er{t asn ol /(oq puetsJepun 01 aruof aSen8ue¡ re¡nrnred e 3o sraleads 's8uluearu relncnred qrr^\ peterJ -osse a8en8uel3o sa¡duexeJo spuesnoqt or ernsodxa qSnon¡1 'asn aSenSue¡ pue Suruearu a8enSue¡ osp tnq ruro3 a8en8ue¡ l¡uo lou lunoroe olur sa>pl leql uonrsrnbce a8en8uel puores pue rsrg r{¡oq roJ uorreue¡dxa uE s¿ (lapou¡ uolr¡redruoc, eqt pagrr3sap (I86I)lauun¡¡trery uerrg pue saleg qteqezrlg

P?otlt uoqtQdruor aql 'sJoJJe uorltzrlEJeuaS¡a,ro 3uu¡eru ua^e 'azrleJaua8 os¡e uec tng rndur uror3 ,urea¡,lpo tou uer 'ue¡8o¡d ¡atndruo¡ e lq pare¡nurs (ursruer{f,au Sulurea¡ e rer{r u,r\oqs seq qf,JpasaJ pasrg-a8esn '1 rardeq3 ur patou sV 'arun E tE pJol( auo raqtaSot ]nd lllensn eJE saserrld Jo seJuelues pur 'spJol'r a18urs ueqr ra8re¡ suun ur pauJeal

lou

l¡rred rsea¡ re sr a8en8uel 'srar{lo pue (1002 't007) sr¡191cr¡ lq parsaSSns ry 'qunrp Jo slrun rrEInuJoJ uo paseg luetxe algeJaprsuof E or pue 'e¡gerclpa;d sr saJuaS re¡ncnred ur Jo uonesJeluoJ freulpro ur asn a,l¿' aSenSuel eql Jo I{3ntu rBI{r 3 og¿ PauollueuJ uollB^Jesgo aql uJoü seluol sr'ral,r paseg-a8esn JoJ ef,uepila Jqr Jo ewos 'JaqteSor uragr af,ueuedxe ol serlrunlJoddo .rarvta3 uaaq a Er{ aJar{t asnBraq .ra>pan flalrl¿ler aq leu laqr ro f¡ruanbarS raqraSor

peJJn)fo aler{ saJnlpa3 a8en8uel eqt esnereg Suo,lls aq feru suonJeuuo3 'tuJoJ qJe^ tfeJJor er{l selelufB unouo¡d rcalgns qoea reqt uerJo os .sl¿s aq, pu¿ les 1, se qcns sa¡druexe pJrar{ a,reg lagr asntf,eq rnq elnJ 1üoDI larp asneraq lou 'tfaJJof luauaa¡3e gra,r-rcefqns ra8 tq8ru " sreuffal 'a¡druexa rog 'punu s,reur?el aqr ur (s)raqro aqr erp^ltlB III^I erntrcJ cnsm8ur¡ Jo leuonenrrs auoJo acuasa¡d aqr l¡enrualg 'Jnf,Jo lar¡r gcrqi'r ur stxaluof er{r pue saJnleeJ a8en8url uea,l\tag s¿ ila,tr sE saJnleal asaql uae,r\teq suonf,euuof, Jo suonErf,oss"Jo >lJo1v\tau ¡e8uo.ns pue raSuo.lts e do¡a,rap sra -ureal ?'rerl srql ot Surp.roly :aqtaSor rn)f,o sarnl¿a3 e8en8uel qf,rq \ qrv\{ lcuanbar3 ar{t pur tndur eqt ur saJnreal :rrsrn8urT f,glleds Je}unorua sJeuJtal

Sututaal a8an&ual puotas Sututal dxE

r12

Exp

laining

second language learning

the fact that the'boy' is the natural agent ofaction in this situation. However,

the SVO pattern is so strong in English that, by the time they are four years old, children hearing this sentence will ignore the fact that boxes dont normally move on their own, and carefully demonstrate how the box pushes the boy. For English speakers, word order patterns are srronger than animacy cues at this point. At this age, children may attribute the SVO relationship to sentences in the passive voice. That is, 'The box was pushed by the boy' may be interpreted as 'The box pushed the boy.' Only later do they learn to pay attention to the grammatical markers that distinguish the active voice sentence from the passive word order.

In contrast, Spanish and Italian have more fexible word orde¡ and speakers of these languages rely more on grammatical markers (for example, the agreement of subject and verb, the case marking of pronouns) or on the animacy of nouns to understand how sentence elements are related. \lhen English speakers are learning these languages, rhey may have difficulry suppressing their tendency to rely on word order as the basis for interpretation. For example, an English speaking learner of Italian may find it confusing to hear sentences such as Il giocanolo guarda il bambino (the toy-is looking at-the boy). An Italian speaker, accustomed ro more fexible word order, focuses on the animacy of the two nouns and concludes rhat the most reasonable interpretation is that the boy is looking at rhe roy. According to the competition model, second language acquisition requires that learners learn the relative importance of the different cues appropriate in the language they are learning

(Mac\flhinney 1997).

AcTtvlTY

Look at how different cues lead to sentence interpretation

Consider the following sentences:

I 2 3 4 5

The boy eats the apple. The apple eats the boy. The dog sees the ball. The ball chases the dog. The ball is chased by the dog.

I

Do they all follow the patterns of English grammar?

2 How can you tell which noun refers to the ogent (the one who performs the action)?

3 ln each sentence,what cue tells you which noun is the agentl 4 ls there more than one cuel 5 Howare sentences 4 and 5 above differentfrom each other?

8,rt

'eJnleuraJd

eJE

Surqf,Eel a8en8ue¡ puofes JoJ r{f,ftaseJ

urtrg pue a8en8ur¡3o suonecr¡dur lue aroJaraql 'sSurpug pexru parnpord seq porlnpuor uaaq seq l¿qt qf,rcaser patrrurl aql 'eJourregrrng 'aur¡dlrslp Sunol B sr srql reqt punu ur da>>1 ot tuer.rodur sr lr (ureJg arp pue Sulureal lurqt ot Sulteurcse3 sr rr alrr¡A aSen8uel puofas uaa^\teq suouleuuol lnoge

'(tOOZ euq€H) saseerrur Zaeqt ur bualrgord sr sassa: -o¡d ¡n:etuls lq pano¡1o; su¡aued Sulssaco¡d Il alll aJotu >lool ot rsJg ar¡ a¡e sassa¡o¡d Jrlueuras ler{l ef,uJprle osle sr eraql 'Sulssaro¡d a8en8uel rsJg Jo reqr alll aJor.u uloo¡ lrrarrce urEJq aqt 'sasearour fcualcgord sJauJEol Z-I uE se teqt u./(oqs ser{ r{rJeeseJ srqtJo aruog 'tndul a8enSue¡3o Sulssacord arp uI saf,uaJaJlp aroldxa ot sa^E^\ ureJq ur fllrrnre IEJrJtJela aqr paJnseeru a ¿q

sarpnls Jer{ro '(t tOZ Er}ereg) Surssaoo¡d I'I roJ seare ar{t ur l¡uo uorrr^nf,a .&\oqs oq./( sJauJEel ¡aSunol qlra es¿f ar{l 10u sl slql 'urEJq eqlJo s€aJE Jeqlo ur uorle^rtoe osle rng Surssaco¡d I-I JoJ pele rtfe aJE tpr{l sBeJE leJneu eures eql ur uone^noe laqr 'rralduoJ ol >lsel pcneuruer8 ¿ ua,rr8 eJe e3rl ul ^\oqs rarel aBenBuEI puofas r a¡rnboe oqlv\ sJauJeal uer{^\'a¡duexa ro¿ l:ualcgord Jo Ia el pue a8e (sJauJeal eqt uo Surpuadap 'pa Jesgo ueeg e^Er{ sarueJeglp :ala \oH 'sa8en8ue¡ puof,as pu¿ rsry r{roq roJ anrl sr slql 'Surssaro¡d a8en8 -ue¡ Sul.rnp urerq ar{tJo sa.laqdsluag qrog ur suonef,ol tueraJqp ur uorlelrlre ,,vroqs serpnls SulSeur ureJq tuafal 'sse¡aqrauo¡ 'urcJg er{r 3o areqdsnuarl UJI er{l ul pal¿lol a.re^/nr suorlrun3 a8en8ue¡ lerp sE^\ uondrunss¿ aql arurl 3uo1 e rog 'rndur a8en8uel rsrg ruo5 f¡ruaraglp rndur aBenBuEI puof,as sassa¡ord urcJg ar{r Jer{req,&r pue urcJq elp Jo sEaJE aures JI{l uI patuasa.lda.l pue parlnbre a¡e sa8enSuel puoras pue rsrg Jeqleq.t\ apnlrur pate8nsa.tut suoltsanb erp Jo aruos 'urerg er{r pue Suturea¡ e8en8ue¡ qlv( peuraJuor sI a.tncads¡ad a,rrlluSoc aqt or parrurl rou tng urytra >lJo^,\ Jo EaJE Jarpouv

uryrq aql ?u? a3un3uu7 'a8en8ue13o asn aql q8norqr surauedSo uorreurrurerep pue 'uorlezr¡o8ater 'l¡a¡.o¡slp aqt sa^lo^ul Suru;ea¡ a8en8ue¡ 'Suturea¡3o slcadse

Jeqlo il" e>lrl reqr pue seruelJedxa a,uuu8oc pue ¡enrdac¡ad ¡no q8norqr peureel sr a8en8ue¡ reql srsaqlodlq aqr uouJuro) uI aAEI{ reqr saqreo.lddt ruaraglp Jo Jegrunu E uo spgnq pur ruog s,&\EJp srlrsln8ur¡ a,uuu8of, terp rsaSSns (SOOZ) slllg >plN pue uosurgo¿ rata¿ 'a;rnbre suerunl{ terp sruatsfs a8pa¡mou¡ xa¡druor arp3o euo tnq s¡ aBenBuBI reqr ,&\eIA erp srg8r1q8ry pue pa8rarua seq ,srrlsrn8ur¡ a,rrtruSor, urJel aql 'srcal luereJ u1 'acuatradxa 3o srseq eqr uo-a8en8ue¡ Surpn¡cul-uolleruJoJul uJeel pue ssaoo;d ol sall -lllge ueunq praua8 Jo eloJ arp sazrsrqdrua a¡'ltceds¡ad a.r'ltluSol aql ¿uo snloJ sra¡eads esoql plno/v\ req¡¡¿qsr¡3u3

u€ql repro pJoM elqrxall aJou e qr¡r* a8en8uel € lo sra¡eads lq pate.rd.ralur oq ¡lepou/ uolllpdun aqt ot Surp.rol)V 9 aq satruoluas asaql tq8rlu

^

Sututaal a&an&ual puota s &uturu1 dxE

rr4

Exp laining second language

learning

nd langaage app lications : Interacting, processin& and practising S e co

no

ticing

A number of hypotheses, theories, and models for explaining second language acquisition have been inspired by the cognitive perspective.

The interaction hypothesis Evelyn Hatch (1978),Michael Long (19S3, 1996), Teres aPica(1994), Susan Gass (1997), and many others have argued rhar conversational interaction is an essential, if not sufficient, condition for second language acquisition. These researchers have studied the ways in which speakers modi$' their speech and their interaction patterns in order to help learners participate in a conversation or understand meaning in a new language. Long (1983) agreed with Krashen that comprehensible input is necessary for language acquisition. However, he focused on the question of how input could be made comprehensible. He argued that modified interaction is the necessary mechanism for making'language comprehensible. That is, what learners

need is opportunities to interact with other speakers, working together to reach mutual comprehension through negotiation for meaning. Through these interactions, interlocutors figure out what they need to do to keep the conversation going and make the input comprehensible to the less proficient speaker. According to Long, there are no cases ofbeginner-level learners acquiring a second language from native-speaker talk that has not been mod-

ified in some way. Modified interaction does not always involve linguistic simplification. It may also include elaboration, slower speech rate, gesture, or the provision of additional contextual cues. Some examples of conversational modifications are:

I

Comprehen5izT¡ ¿hs¡ps-efforts by the native speaker to ensure that the learner has understood (for example, 'The bus leaves at 6:30. Do you

understand?').

2

3

Clarifcation requestt-efforts by the learner to get ¡he native speaker to clari$' something that has not been understood (for example, 'Could you repeat please?'). These requests from the learner lead to further modifications by the native speaker. Self-repetition or paraphrase-the more proficient speaker repeats his or her sentence either partially or in its entirety (for example, 'She got lost on her way home from school. She was walking home from school. She got lost.').

Long (1996) revised the interaction hypothesis, placing more emphasis on cognitive factors such as 'noticing' and corrective feedback during inter-

action. 'When communication is difficult, interlocutors must 'negotiate for meaning', and this negotiation is seen as the opportunity for language

III

aq¡Jo >llerr rdal pue >1;or'r;rcd ur sreur¿al peprof,ar (866I) uqdrl uoreqs pue urc-&\S IIuraW 'pe>lro^\ laqr se o8en8uel rnog¿ pelnou laqr ter{^\ olur rq8rsul aruos Surpr,rord snrp 'lf,EJl ot sfe-/y\ punoJ eAEq sJer{fJeeseJ IEJaAaS .r{f,JeasoJ 3o rcalqo aqt eq ol enur} -uof, uorluerre puE ssaueJelv\E 3o aruerrodwr aqr lnogE suorlsanb asagl 'tndul agr ur SurqraruosJo ssauaJe./v\e s Jeurcel agr lq lou .Sulssacord ro3 alqe lle^e sl Sulqrauros r{rlr{^a guzur buanbarj eqr lq parcrpard lsaq sr uorlrsrnbre Jo pooqrle>lll aql 'e^nrads-rad paseq-a8esn E ruorC '3ulureal ol Jtnqrrtuor uec 'f¡euonualul tr or SurpuaDe Jo tr3o eJE.&\E tou eJe e \JI ua,ra .,aceds 8ur -ssaoord, Ietueru, Jno dn sasn teqr Surqilut ,seuoeql Surssaro¡d uonetuJoJur or Surp.ro:ry 'arugap alq¿reprsuor 3o rralqo aqr sl rndur Jqr ur Surqraruos 3o uolrsanb eql ,8urcnou,

a.re

lagr layt

a¿amp aq rsnru sJeuJeel Jeqleq,&\

'a8en8uel aqr3o a8pa¡uoul rrar{l ur dr8

faqt teqrvt tuo5 ruaJeJrp

sr 13qr

¿ sllg rer{l;o peloadxa aSenSuq puosJs aqr ul Sulqteuros af,nou sJa

-uJeal ueq/r\ suÉag reqr ssarord Surureal E paqrJrsap osp (886I) sse) uESnS 'lndul eqt ur tr Jo JJEIv\E atuooeq peq lagr ¡tun aJntEeJ a8en8uel E aJrnbre or ur8ag tou plnof, sreurrel a8en8ue¡ puoras ter{t pazr$qrodlq lprruqls

'sauoeql Sulueal prlSo¡ogclsd uo Sulme.lq 'ruarps rueqt operu ef,ueuedxa Jarpo aruos Jo sself, ur uonuene sry or rq8noJq aJa.& laqr asnmaq se./r\ srql 'uraqr Pef,nou pBq er{ uaqr'r f¡uo u¡arsfs aSrnSue¡ puof,3s u.&o srq Jelua 01 ue8aq eurr elor{ \ ar{r ro3 luauruorrlua arp ur ruasa¡d ueaq peq rerp a8en8ue¡ (lrzeJg ul Jo saJnteal urttJef ñqt ¿ztla¿J or ue8ag ag 'lrerp e Surdaa>1 pue 8ur,rr¡'sesselc 8ur1er;o sqtuoru rar3.y'asan8nlJodJo JauJEel e se aluar¡adxa u,&o srq ruo5 eurer srsaqrodlg Surcnou er{r Jo ¡esodord pulSlro s.lpnuqls 'aJnl¿al a8en8utl -re¡ncn¡¿d eJo ere^\E saruoJeg JauJ"el eqt ssalun aSpa¡ruroul a8enSue¡ u¡ qrmor8 ol peal lou saop tndur alqrsuagarduroo 'arlncadsrad srgr ruor¿ 'rurod 8u¡l¡rls lenuassa eql sr tr lnq (uonrsrnbce ur tFsal Jlastr tou saop SunnoN '(paruou, uaaq seq rl ssepn paurcel sl Sulgrou tBr{t Surlseg -8ns 'srsaqroüq 8u¡rrrou eql pasodo.rd (tOOZ '066I) tprrur{rs prer{rDr srsaqrodÍq8ulcnou aq1

'tuaudola,rap Jrerp ur peeqe sJauJeel ¡snd 'pazrsa

-r¡rodlq aqs 'tndlno a¡qrsuaga.rduor Sunnpord jo spueuap eql 'Suluratu rragr ssardxa ol sfe¡vl ¡auaq pug ol paeu eqr pue Ánrqe a8rn8ue¡ puof,as Jrar{r Jo

slIuII eql aas or l¡a>1¡¡ rsoru err faqr 'puelsrepun

uEf,

rolnrolralur rrar.lt leql

a8enSuel arnpord tsnur sJeureal uar{^\ rpqt penBJE er{S 'srser{rodfg rndrno a¡qrsuaqardruor (186I) EulE \S IIrrreW sr srql ol petBIeU 'rueudo¡a,rep

Sutuwal a8un&uul puotas &ururu1 dxE

116

Exp laining second language

learning

language features they mentioned. These research designs cannot tell us if learners noticed things they did not mention. However, they do make it possible to identify some things that learners were aware of and to look at how this awareness is related to measures oftheir language knowledge. The extent to which learners' noticing oflanguage features affects their second language development will come up again in our discussion of research on second language acquisition in the classroom in Chapters 5 and 6.

Input processing In his research with American university students learning foreign languages, Bill VanPatten (2004) observed many cases of students misinterpreting sentences. For example, as predicted by the competition model discussed earlier in this chapte¡ when English speakers heard sentences in Spanish, they used word order to interpret the relationships among the nouns in the sentence. Thus, they interpreted'La sig,re el señor'as'She (subject pronoun) follows the man. The correct interpretation is 'Her (object pronoun) follows the man (subject of the sentence). In otherwords, rhe correct English translation would be 'The man follows her'. In order to understand that, students need to learn that in Spanish, a pronoun object often precedes the verb and that, rather than rely on the word order alone, it is essential to pay artenrion to whether the form of the pronoun indicates a subject or an object. VanPatten argued that the problem arose in part from the fact that learners have limited processing capacity and cannot pay attention to form and meaning at the same time. Not surprisingl¡ they tend to give priority to meaning, overlooking some features of the language form. \X/hen the context in which they hear a sentence helps them make sense of it, that is a good strategy for understanding the general idea, but it may interfere with learners' progress in acquiring the language. In Chapter 6 we will see how VanPatten developed instructional procedures that require learners to focus on the specific language features in order to interpret the meaning, thus pushing them to acquire those features.

Processability theory Jürgen Meisel, Harald Clahsen, and Manfred Pienemann (1981) studied the acquisition of German by a group of adult migrant workers who had little or no second language instruction. They analysed large samples of their speech

and described the details of developmental sequences in their production of simple and complex sentences. They concluded that the sequence ofdevelopment for features of syntax and morphology was affected by how easy these were to process. Ease of processing was found to depend to a large extent on the position of those features in a sentence. Features that rypically occurred at the beginning or end of a sentence were easier to process (and learn) than those in the middle. All learners acquired the features in the same sequence,

LII

Jrer{} lq 'r{c¡{¡n senrlnre urooJsself uo paseq sr pue a,rncads¡ad a¡l}lu3or aqt uo s,^aeJp tI '(sruau8ag qcaadg lenuessgJo stxatuoJ a^nefrunuJuroJ ur uorlezneulotnv) SSEIfV peller Surrpear a8en8ue¡ or qreordde ue pado -lo^ap a^Eq (1002 'BB6i) zrr.no¡e8ag ueuroN pu¿ uotuogreD r{raqezrlg

'sruJoj

lEnuessa->Is?l uo sn3oJ E aq PFor{s

':':'H,':il il ilffi:

araqll

€

:liillÍ í

:a,rncads¡ad (lsruonf,BJelur-a,Lllru3oo, aqt sllE3 ar{s tBri,/v\ ruou lno perJJEJ sE sees aqs rer{r uroorsselr a8enSuel u8ra-ro3 aqr

qlreeser arp qrr^\ algrredruoc

ul acncr.rd ;o3 sa¡dnur.rd aarrp pasodo.rd seq (/002) e8ar.rg seprnoT 'e)n -crrd ro3 saluuuroddo lq parcege osle a.re Sulpea.r pue Suluarsrl 'a8en8ue¡ Jo uollcnpord arp ot perrrurl tou sr 1r pue 'lef,ruerlf,eur tou sr ruaudo¡a,rap a8en8ue¡ JoJ papaou acllce¡d aqt 'a,rrrcads¡ad a¡rlru3or ar{t ruo5 rer{r aloN 'erueurroJJad cneruotne ot ueqr pue a8pe¡r'roul lernparo¡d ot a8pa¡nou1

e

nBJEISap slJaluo3 f,f,n3erd mog re l¡aso¡c

arou SuDIool.lvrou

eJE

sJer{fJeese¡

'uraqt qtr.&\ paterf,oss€ (s)Buluearu aqt pue pelllrp Surag su;ar -r¿d aBenBuEI eqr uae \lag uonoouuor erp e>pru ot pelltJ ueuo uonf,nJlsur pn8ul¡orpne pezrrerf,¿rpqf, rer{r sllrJp arp '9 .rardeg3 ur ees illu a¡,r sV'ur"al ot seqsra auo rBrll Jnol^Eqaq aqr sasrtr¿¡d auoJr a lDega lpo sl acrtce;d terp rulod aqr pessrtu ursrJnorler{eqJo suorrele¡d¡alul ruooJsself, eruos ler.ll stJesse (866I) .rasla;¡ag uagod 'Sururea¡ a8enSue¡3o tuauodtuoc prluesse uE tou sr acltce¡d leqt 'Jale,lrroq 'ueeru lou seop srql 'afualadruor a,,tlleclunulluof, ol pea¡ l¡rnsn lou seop asn a8rn8ue¡ ¡nj8ulueau ruou af,ItreJd sateredas ttgr pue Ilrrp uo paseg sr reqr Sururea¡ or qceordde ue 'a¡llcads.rad rsrrnor,regag er{t suorssnlsrp ur ,l.res a1'r ryarltrerd sl a,rrlrads¡ad a,rnluSor aqt urgrft\ Jo E uaas srr{ reqr Surureal a8en8url 3o ruauodruof, auo lseJelur Jo IE^\euaJ erl]f,¿rdJo elor eql

'7:etdeq3 ur suoltsanb pue sarlrtr8au Jo uonrsrnboe agr ut slql 3o saldruexe 1v\Es alnr 'a8en8ue¡ lsry Jraql ur lslxe ,(pea4e leqr sernree3 agr 3o a8pa¡r'rou1 rrarp esn uer lagr eroJag a8en8ue¡ puoras agr ur llced¿c Surssa¡o¡d3o ¡a.La¡ ur?lraf, E dola,rap or a,req lagr 'pealsul 'uolllslnbce3o se8ers llrea tt aSen8ue¡ rsJg Jlar{t ruo{ sernt¿eJ re3suerl f¡drurs tou op sraurEal lgz'r sulrldxe lroagr srr{ rel{r sanS¡e eH 'aouangur a8en8uel lsJg qrr^/\ sacuanbas ¡eruarudo¡a,rap3o uorre.r8 -atur aqr sr lroagr slg jo rcadse tuel¡odrut auo 'lEtuJoJuI pu¿ FuoIlJnJlsuI qrog 's8unras 3o ltaue,r r ul saBenBuEI ruaJaglp Jo sJauJeal I{lt.ry\ r{3rceseJ

Jo srseg ar{t uo lroeqr A¡¡¡qussacord padola,rap GOO7 'GGGI) uupueuerd 'saSers 'saJnlBal ¡rr IEuoIreIJ¿^ sE ol PaJJaJaJ eJald esaql -uarudola,rap ruaJeglp tE era.4a oq,/$, sreurea¡ fq pasn pur peurcal aq ppot pu" slureJtsuoJ asagr lq parfegt eq ol uJJes rou ptp saJnlral a8en8ut¡ eruos lrr{r punoJ osl" srer{f,reeser ar{I 'sater ruaraJlp re passarSord farp g8noqr ua,ra &uruwa1 a8anSual puotas Sututal dxE

118

Exp

laining

second language

learning

nature, require learners to use meaningful units of language repetitiyely in contexts where there are genuine exchanges of meaning. The goal is to provide opportunities for using these units with sufficient frequenry that they will become automatic. Segalowitz (2010) has emphasized the importance of increasing the amount of language that can be used automatically, thus freeing more cognitive resources for learning new things. Paul Nation (2007) has suggested that automaticity, which he,like Segalowitz, refers to as 'fuenry' may be the most neglected aspect of language teaching in contexts where instruction focuses primarily on meaning.

The sociocultural perspective in Chapter 1, Vygotskyt theory assumes that cognitive development, includinglanguage development, arises as a resultofsocial interactions. Unlike the psychological theories that view thinking and speaking as related but independent processes, sociocultural theory views speaking and thinking as tightly interwoven. Speaking (and writing) mediates thinking, which means that people can gain control over their mental processes as a consequence of internalizing what others say to them and what they say to others. This internalizing is thought to occur when an individual interacts with an interlocutor within his or her zone of proximal development (ZPD)-that is, in a situation in which the learner can perform at a higher level because of the support (scaffolding) offered by an interlocutor. As we saw

In some ways, this approach may appear to restate some of the hypotheses encountered elsewhere in this chapter. In fact, people sometimes wonder '$7'illiam Dunn and James whether the ZPD is the same as Krashent I +1. Lantolf (1993) addressed this question in a review article, arguing that it is not possible to compare the two concepts because they depend on very different ideas about how development occurs . The ZPD is a metaphorical location or 'site' in which learners co-construct knowledge in collaboration with an interlocutor. In Krashen's i + 1, the input comes from outside the learner and the emphasis is on the comprehensibiliry of input that includes language structures that are just beyond the learner's current developmental

in ZPD is on development and how learners co-consffuct knowledge based on their interaction with their interlocutor or in

level. The emphasis priYate speech.

Vygotskyan theory has also been compared to the interaction hypothesis be cause ofthe interlocutor's role in helping learners understand and be understood. These two perspectiyes differ primarily in the emphasis they place on the internal cognitive processes. In the interaction hypothesis, the emphasis is on the individual cognitive processes in the mind of the learner. Interaction facilitates those cognitive processes by giving learners access to the input they need to activate internal processes. In Vygotskyan theor¡ greater importance

6II

a8en8ur¡ puoras u¡ tueuodrur s¿ uortf,EJelur oslr orfy\ sJer{fJeasal Jarlto ^\ar^ Jo lBqr pue a,rn:adsrad prnrprorlos eql uaa \teg afuaJaJlp eql eJoJsJeqI '(L6 'd),lrrnrrre IErJos sr rl pue ór^rlf,e a¡.lllu8o¡ sr 11 '8ulurca¡ a8rn8ue¡ 8ur -lerpJru asn a8en8uel $ lI 'Jn)f,o-of, uEf, Sururea¡ a8en8uel pue asn a8en8ue1, arar1lvr rxeluof, etp sE aseqr se qf,ns sanSo¡urp e^rrtJogBllof, sraprsuof, (OOOZ) ssardxa ot lseg aJa,{a sruJoJ reqrtr Sulprcap pue reqraSor lf,aJJof, Jrp rnoqe sasaqrodlg Sunsat eJe \ sJa ulE^&S '8uru¿aru

laqt

uaqt Sulssnfsrp 'asn ot sruJo;

-uJeel 'l rerdeg3 ur g >lser uon¿rrunruruo3 ur u./!Loqs sy'Surueaur pue r.uJoJ ot uollualle rrar{t ./'rerp l¡snoaurr¡nurrs ter{t (8uur,la. pue 8ur¡eads 'a.l) slsrr uorrnpord ul SulSe8ua alrr¡rvr a8payz'rou1 onsrn8ull DnJlsuof,-of, sJeuJ¿el aSen8ue¡ puoces ^,'l'oq auruJetep ol serpntsJo serJes E tno parJJef, a,req san8ea¡ -lof, rrer{} pue ur1de1 pue ur¿1úS 'an8o¡elp a^p"roqeilof, urrar aqr Suls¡ d.roagr lq parenlrou ueeq seq >lJo^t tuefeJ aJou tng ,l.roagr leJntlnforfos lq paruangur se.lvr slsaqrodfg tndtno eqr uo >1.rorvr l¡rea sJIerAS

a,rnruSo¡

'Sulurea¡ a8en8uel puof,

as

uo tndlno Jo srf,age arp ele8nse^ur ot r{JJEaseJ a^rsuatxa tno parJJEf a Er{ san8ea¡¡oc Jer{ pue aqs 'uaql aJurs 'suJooJssEIJ uorsJeruur r{JueJC ur (rndrno 'a'r) uonrnpord ¡egra,r ul a8e8ua ot sJauJ¿al JoJ senrunlJoddo a.rou parec

-o^p¿ eqs 'uolsuaqa;druor Surualsll pue Surpear rrarp ur urgr uoncnpord uJllrJlr\ pue ua>1ods Jraqr ur JelEa./v\ l¡qe.raplsuof, JJe,r\ sluapnls uorsJJuJurr qruarg ter{l uone^resgo aqt uo paseg srsarpod&¡ rndtno algrsuaqardruof, aqr pesodord lsrg (Eg6I) ur".e\S 'a8en8uelJo uorsueqe;duoc er{r ro; op llrrru -rpro fagr ueqr a8en8ue¡ q8norqr passardxa sr Suluearu ¡aoq ot uonuetle a¡ou f¿d rsnru laql 'a8en8url arnpord ol eABq sJauJeal uJr{^\ ter{r uonou aql pue srsagrodlg rndtno a¡qrsuagardruof, EurE/lrS u¡ sulSrro slr s"q >lro/rl, rraql 'sarurur¡8o¡d uors¡aruul {rua-rg uerpeueC ur Sururra¡ a8en8ur¡ puoles JoJ suorteur¡dxa lernllnf,orf,os palr8nsa,rur a Er{ or{,4 '(ZOO1) uu1de1 uoJer{S pue urE.^^s llrrretr { Jo >lJo-/ú 3r{1 ruo5 u aldruexa ar[L 'saJnlsrd uor3 auqlrots e tf,nJtsuof, or lrr laqt sB sqJa e rxegal qJueJC grru.8ur¡88nJls eJe sJaurcel aql 'rdracxa reql uI '(LgI 'd) g rardeq3 ur g >lser uonef,runruruo3 ur $ srrltJo a¡druexa uV 'suon3tJetur JeuJEal-JauJEel Jo ef,r^ou-ef,rlou apnlour ol uJJel aqr peuepeoJq ser{ >lJo,&\ lua)al 'JaAe.&\oH 'oJr^ou e pue uadxe uB a^lo ur ol poorsJapun ueag s¿q C¿Z agr 'l¡euonrpe[ 'sJe>leads raqro qrl^/\ rre -Jalul pue areroqellor laqr uar¡rvr a8rn8ue¡ errnbf,e sJaurpel a8rn8uel puof,es r'rog Surrv'ogs ur palseralur arc srar{to pue '(y66I) orEUoC preqrrx ,(OOOZ)

JIoluBT rurf 'uorlrsrnbo¿ a8en8uel puoJas ot lroaqr url¡sro8,(¡ Sulpuarxg

3u7q7w

sl a8pay*ou>l

sE

tq SuVutuaT :suott?rtlddy a8unSury ?uoras 'Ál,ulo¿ pf oos Sulrnp pazrleuJarur uorlerpau Sulrnp sassaco¡d a,rrt¡u3o¡ ;raqt ezrue8JoeJ pue

Jo Iorruof, ule8 a¡doad lEr{l sploq l-roagr prnllnf,orf,os 'uourrJelul IEIros aqt g8norqr 8ul¡.rnc¡o Sulurea¡ qlw\'sa^lesueqt suorlesJaluof, erp or peqr¿ue sr &urutua1 aSanBuE yuotas SututrydxE

t20

Exp

laining

secorud

knguage learning

acquisition is that sociocultural theorists assume that the cognitive processes begin as an external socially mediated acdvity and eventually become internalized. Other interactionist models assume that modified input and interaction provide learners with the raw material that is interpreted and analysed through internal cognitive processes.

Summary In the end, what all theories of language acquisition are intended to account for is the ability of human learners to acquire language within a variety of social and instructional environments. All of the theories discussed in this chapter and in Chapter 1 use metaphors to represent something that cannot be observed directly.

Linguists working from an innatist perspective draw much of their evidence from studies of the complexities of proficient speakers' knowledge of language and from analysis of their own intuitions about language. Cognitive and developmental psychologists argue that it is not enough to know what the final state of knowledge is and that more attention should be paid to corpus-based studies of the input, as well as to the developmental steps leading up to the achievement of high levels of proficiency. Recent cognitive perspectives have often involved computer simulations or controlled laboratory experiments where people learn specific sets of carefullychosen linguistic features, often in an invented language. Manylinguists argue that this does not entitle psychologists to generalize to the complexities of the linguistic knowledge that learners eventually have.

Interactionists emphasize the role of negotiation for meaning in conversational interactions. This perspective and the sociocultural perspective provide insights into the ways in which learners can gain access to new knowledge

about the language when they have support from an interlocutor. Some linguists challenge the interactionist position, arguing that much of what learners need to know is not available in the input, and so they put greater emphasis on innate principles of language that learners can draw on. Both linguists and psychologists draw some of their evidence from neurological research. At present, most of the research on language representation in the brain and specific neurological activity during language processing is inconclusive. However, advances in technology are rapidly increasing opportunities to observe brain activiry more directly. Such research will eventually contribute to reinterpretations of research that previously could examine only the observable behaviour of learners speaking or performing other language tasks.

Educators who are hoping that language acquisition theories will give them insight into language teaching practice are often frustrated by the lack of

t7,l

¿lueilodu¡r (os¡e) sr rndur pag¡¡du¡s reqr >¡u¡qr nol oC ¿uor]leJaru! pagrpotu uro4 rgaueq or l¡a>¡r¡ lsour aJE sJeuJeel a8en8ue¡ puof,as qf,rq/v\ ur slxatuo) aql aJe req¡¡¿3uru.rea¡ r.roddns tou leu teql seJntee, euios eJaqt aJV¿sJeuJ€e¡ or ¡n¡d¡aq l¡¡erradsa eJ€ )u!t{t no,( reqr uoDf,eJalur paurporu lo saJnleaj aqt Jo euos aJ€ req¡¡¿qree ¡o sa¡duexa auos lo >¡u¡qr nol ue3'tndur (pagr¡drurs .ro) pagrporu uor¡ paqsrn3urlsrp sr srql'sJauJea¡ a8en8ue¡ puof,es Jo, afJnosal lelluassa ue s€ uaes sr uorlf,eJetur paurpoLu'srsaqrodlq uorlreJalur aqt lo alrlf,ads.rad eql LuoJl € ¿sluepnts "rnol ¡o asoLlt rrroJ,

ro 'secue¡radxa Suru.rea¡ aBen8ue¡ ur"ro.lnol wot¡8,ut>rlou ¡o se¡duexa lue arreq nol oC 's)Jo^ e8enSue¡ le3;el aqr /y\oq rnoqe 3u¡qrauos puplsJepun laqr uaqan sluau.¡or..u .eqe, e^€q op l¡ureilar sJeuJeal e8en8ue¡ u€ uala Jo sseuaJe^ e lue lnoqlr¡"r ,(¡uappns

puolas 'Jenel oH 'uJ€el ol uorluatur

',{¡¡otuapout uJeal o} a¡qrssod osle s! l! teqt panS"re ueeq seq rl 'sl reql Suteq st l€q/v\,o ssaueJe^ e sa^lolu!

'l€rsJeloJluof, l€ql euos sr-peuJeol sllnpe ur Sururee¡ a8en8ue¡ puof,as lle

leqt-slsaqrodlq Surcrlou srlprurqls

¿^ ar^ srql ot nol rq8no-rq reuJeal Jo Jaqf,sot e se saf,ualJadxe "rnol aAEq ot{ 'os }l ¿pauJeol aJ€ ^ sa8en8ue¡ l orl ,o Surpuetsrepun u/v\o rnol qlrr"r luelsrsuof, aJou uaql jo auo s¡ 'laldeql slrlt ur pesodo.rd uaaq a^Eq Sururea¡ Zl Jo, serJoeqt l€JaAeS

Z

I

uolpoEeJ ro, suollseno

uo,,,srnboea'rn'uelJl"JiyffilTlfi 'JJ";1,::J";]?H";T,X'i:ü; suonf,egeJ (sJeqf,eel Sulpln8 ul p3d¡ag aJoru sI teqt uolteuJ.rojur epnord leru gcreasal slr{I 'par¡dul l¡arau seuruaruos 'perels lplrr¡dxa seurrlauros (suonetuarJo lrlrleJoer{r Jo a8ue¡ epllr\ E uo s,e\EJp I{3J€asJJ par¡dde 1o lpoq puof,esJo lroaqr a,l,lsuaqardruor EJo aruesge 3ur,no;8

y '8uru.rea¡ a8en8uel

aql ur arueurojrad (stuapnls sses$ pue suossal ue¡d pue r{Jtel or enulruol ¡¡rs rsnru laqt 'tsaJatur grrz* ruaudo¡alap,{-roaqr I{J}E1'\ sJaqf,eer eruos elI[DA, 'acn¡e¡d Sulgoear a8en8ue¡

roj parardrarur aq ppor{s lroaqr aql,t\oq lnoge suonsanb aq ilns ppo,/nr erel{r 'per{JEaJ aJe{\ tueruea;8e gcns JI ue g go lerrr 3uo1 e 'lsJg lB ,{¡qeqord sl uorlrsrnbr¿ a8en8ue¡3o lroaqr ,ala¡druoc, ¿ uo lueulaar8e rnq '8ulurea1 pue Surqrear aSen8ue¡ roJ arurr5lu8ls ru¡at-8uo¡ tueuodrul seq po8 sll sp tuJur -do¡a,rap lroaqr sBq t¿qr qf,Jeese¿ 'autr 8uo¡ E roJ uo lJol't ol enunuor III^\ slsnuarls teqr sapznd tuasa¡da¡ 'uolllsrnb¡e a8en8ur¡ lsJgJo esol{t DIIT 'uoll -lslnbr¿ a8en8ur¡ puof,asJo sanua¡duror ag1 ',slradxa, agt Suorur ruau¡aa¡8¿ &utu"raa1 a&an&ua¡

yuota s &ururu1 dxE

122

Expkining

second language learning

Suggestions for further reading Dórnyei, 2.2009. The Psycholog\ of second Language Acquisition. oxford: Oxford Universiry Press. This overview of the theories that have been proposed to explain second language acquisition is both comprehensive and."ry ro read. óórnyei provides detailed treatment of the theories that are discussed in this .t

"p,.r, focusing particularly on those arising from the research in cognitive psychology. In addition, the book intioduces the work in neurobiology that provides a new level of explanation for language acquisition ur!. swain, M.,

"rd

Kinnear, and L. steinman. 2070. sociocurtural Theory and sen.nd Language Education: An Introduction through Narratiues. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. In this book the authors cover rhe key concepts ofsociocultural theory (for example, mediation, zone_ of proximal development, privare ,p...h, collaborative dialogue) through the use of narratives. The narratives come from the voices oflanguage learners and teachers from different educational contexts. The book is of particular interest to readers motivated to understand how sociocultural theory relates to the teaching and learning ofsecond languages. P.

vanPatten, B. andJ. tülilliams (eds.). 2007 . Theories in second Language Acquisition: An Introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

vanPatten and \Tilliams set our a list ofobservations that have arisen from research studies in second language acquisition. Then, well-known authors discuss how the theoretical framework in which theyhave done their own research would explain these obseryations. For example, there are chapters on ljniversal Grammar, sociocultural theor¡ skill acquisition theory, processab.ility, and input processing. The chapte* ate biief (about 20 pages, including discussion questions and readings) and wrimen in a style lrri, i, accessible to those with limited background in research and theory. The final chapte¡ by Lourdes ortega, ptorrid., a concise overview of the different theories and identifies some ongoing challenges for explaining second language acquisition.

a^Eq l¿.u sass'If,^pes"g-arnrJnrrs ur sluJpnls e.'os .egen8ue¡ ra8rer aqr Jo salnJ Ff,rt"rurue¡8 p_ue lre¡nqeoor\ aqr uJEel sluJpnls rBr{l rl ot eas ol ,, ¡"óe s,rer{reat aq1 'aSen8ue¡ aqr lq parrJef, sa8esseru aql uo uErF rerper Jlastr a8tn8ue¡ aqr uo sr snf,oJ aql 'sJaufta¡ a8en8ur¡ u8raro3 ro p.rorrr'jo dlord e or rqSner sr aSen8ue¡ eql 'sruauuoJr^ua lEuonJnJrsul pasBg-aJnrf,nJrs uI se s¡aa d ql r^, u o rlf, Eral u r E

qfns uJ 'a3rn3ue1 ar{rJo

ur,',",;

:ilL'JlH:iffil *i*T*: ; Jl:il

sJeuJEel pJE./r\o]

" ,r"qr rr,F", sraleads a nEu pJE \o1

ParraJrp sr uonf,nJlsur aqr eJar{./$. pue aSenSue¡ raSrer ar{t Jo sraleads e^n¿u ,p¡qc E sr JauJEel aJ¿ uaJplrr{f, Jer{ro eqrJo lsolu eJeg^,!\ uorlEntrs Ioor{JS e ul aqr gr '.ro uorlf¿Jelur lEr)os ur Jo >lJo,e\ re a8en8ur¡ eqr or pasodxa sr JeuJEel 3r{r q)rq^{ ur esoql sE poolsrepun eq pFoqs slxaluof, uollsrnb¡e [EJnrEN

s8u¡rtas

puorpnrlsul pue IBrnreN ¿apY'ord uer

a¡nsodxa leJnleu lou pu¿ uonf,nJlsur f¡uo rer¡r suorlngrJluof, lBnuesse eJar{] 1" tO ¿al!\ PFoqS ¿uooJsself aqr uI luauluoJrAua aurcs aqt elBaJJ e./r\ u¿J ¿8u¡urea¡ a8rn€ue1 (l¿Jnleu, slqr rnoqe ¡e,ads sr r,qAr .*ooirr"¡, eql eplsrno o8en8ue¡ agr Sulsn acuar¡adxa e^¿q prq sJaureal lsoru r'r{} r,eJ InJssa¡ns eql uo péseq eq leru jar¡aq sql .a^nf,agJ aJour sr aqt uo, Bururea¡ rrqr (leerts azrarlaq lue¡A¡ 'ruooJSsBIJ arp ur Sulu;eal woü rueJaJrp sl Sunlas lEuonf,nJlsur ur a8en8uel puo3es r Sururea¡ '7 ntdeya ul ól,rrlce Jr{l ur a \ ry

-uou

B

^\ES

'uorlsnJlsur lnoqll1ü a8en8uel B urea¡ aldoad arar{.{\ s8uuas Jeqro pue Bururea¡ a8effiuef ro3 ^\au s8unras ruooJsself uee \leq saJueJeJrp eqr uo DeHaJ or luau¡our e a{Er sn rel eJoJag 'stuooJssBl3 J8en8uel puof,as ur uo sao8 rer¡rrt paquf,sep puB

'snp op

a./\^,

Pa^Jasgo e^sr{ sJer{f,JEasal qfrr.l./ú.

ul slex\ luoJeJlp aro¡dxa

az* rerdegc snp

uI

/r4.el eJd

WOOUSSVff,

ECVNDNVf CINOf,iIS IIHI NI DNIHf,VEI ONV DNINUVEf DNIAUESSO

r24

Obseruing learning and teaching in the second kngudge classroom

opportunities to continue learning the target language outside the classroom; for others, the classroom is the only contact with that language. In some cases' the learners' goal may be to pass an examination rather than to use the language for daily communicative interaction beyond the classroom. Communicative, content-based, and task-based instructional environments also involve learners whose goal is learning the language itself, but the sryle

of

instruction places the emphasis on interaction, conversation, and language use, rather than on learningaboutthelanguage. The topics that are discussed in communicative and task-based instructional environments are often of general interest to the learner, for example, how to obtain a driver's license. In content-based language teaching (cBLr), the focus of a lesson is usually on the subject matter, such as history or mathematics, which students are learning through the medium of the second language. In these classes, rhe focus may occasionally be on the language itself, but the emphasis is on using the language rather than talking about it. The language that teachers use foi teaching is not selected solely for the purpose of teaching a specific feature of the language, but also to make sure learners have the language they need to interact in a variety ofcontexts. Students' success in these courses is often measured in terms of their abiliry to 'get things done' in the second language, rather than on their accuracy in using certain grammatical features.

fn natural acquisition settings 'W.hen

people learn languages at work, in social inreracrions, or on the playground, their experiences are often quite different from those of learners in classrooms. CompleteThble 5.1 on the nexr page. As you look at the pattern of + and - signs you have placed in the charr, you will probably find it matches the descriptions below.

. . . . .

Language is not presented step by step. The learner is exposed to a wide variety of vocabulary and structures. Learners' errors are rarely corrected. If their interlocutors can understand what they are saying, they do nor remark on the correctness of the learners' speech. They would probably feel it was rude to do so. The learner is surrounded by the language for many hours each day. Sometimes the language is addressed to the learner; sometimes it is

simply overheard. The learner usually encounters a number of different people who use the target language proficiently. Learners observe or participate in many different rypes of language events: brief greetings, commercial transactions, exchanges of information, arguments, instruction at school and in workplace interactions.

g7l

luaPnls

-luoPnls

Swutoa¡ aSon&uo¡ toJ s?xaluo, ssa.r¿

llrsta,tu¡ pJorxg O

l.g amq[

e¡geldotoroq¿

lndur peurpoLu

ol ssef,f,v ol

)eads aJnsseJd

sad& as.rno¡srp pue aSenSue¡

¡o lra¡.re¡ sJeuJeel 01

s;e¡eads e,rrleu

lo one.¡ r.l3rH Surutea¡

rol aull a¡druy SJOJJA

uo )f,eqPaa,

tuanbar¡ eurlt

E re 8u¡qr auo Surureal

luapnls -Jeq)eel uo!lrnJlsu!

uollfnrlsu! a^!l€)!unl"ul.rloc ¿

Pes€q

-eJnlfnJls

uo¡1¡s¡nbee

leJN}?N

s)!lsuelf€JPtl3

uorlf, eJatu r luap nls-Jaqf, Eal ut suaddeq lEq/v\ LuoJt luaJa#l p

reql sl ¿Jeqto qf,ea ot )lel sJauJ€al ueqr* sueddeq leq6'uortl€Jotur luepnts

-luePnls PUE luaPnls-JeqlPel olu! PePtNpqns uaaq sPq ut!nlol (uotlJnJlsut a^rlef,runuuo3, aqr leql eloN 'aJns lou aJ€ nol ¡r ,¿, alr.r¡¡?xeluof, teqt ur pug tou op l¡¡ensn nol Surqtauos s! l! ¡r (-) snurur e lreN 'txaluof, reqt ro ¡errdft st f,nstralf,eJeq) eql l elqer aql u¡ (4) snld € IJEN 'tuesqe ;o luasa.ld a;e Tal aqr uo sf,DsrJalf,eJeqr eql Jaqleq^ aPDep'ualuof, r,.l)ea Jol'uunlof, qlee lq patuasa.rdoJ slxeluof, Jno¡ aql to sf,tlstJalf,eJeql aLlr rnoq€ >¡u¡q1.3uru.rea¡ a8en8ue¡ puo)as Jo, slxetuof, leuotl)nJ¡sut pue leJnleu a.ledulo¡ e^ .auo slr.ll ul 'sJeuJ€a¡ a8en8ue¡ puoles pue rsJUro sa¡go.rd eqt pe.redr,uof, e^ ,upqf, teqr ul'¿.retdeq3 ur l'Z alqef ur auo eLF ol relr.urs sl l'S elqelul lJ€q) eql

slxoluo)tulu.lea¡eJedtuo) AItAtIf,v utootssplr aSun&uq yuocas ar¡t ut Sutr.ltaat yua Surutaal Sumtasqg

126

Obseruing learning and teaching in the second knguage classroom

Older children and adults may also encounrer the written language in the use ofvideo and web-based materials. Learners must often use their limited second language ability to respond to questions or to ger information. In these situations, the emphasis is on getting meaning across clearl¡ and more proficient speakers tend to be tolerant of errors that do not interfere with meaning. Modified input is available in many one-ro-one conversarions. In situations where many native speakers are involved in the conyersation, however, learners may have difficulty gerring access ro language they can understand.

In structure- b ased insnuctional s ettings The events and activities rhar are rypical of strucrure-based instruction differ from those encountered in natural acquisition settings. In grammar translation approaches, there is considerable use of reading and writing, as learners üanslate texts from one language to another, and grammar rules are taught

explicitly. In audiolingual approaches there is little use of translation, and learners are expected to learn mainly through repetition and habit formarion, although they may be asked to figure out the grammar rules for the sentences they have memorized.

.

Linguistic items are presented and practised in isolation, one item at in a sequence from what teachers or textbook writers believe is 'simple' to thar which is 'complex . Errors are frequently corrected. Accuracy tends to be given priority over meaningful interaction. Learning is often limited to a few hours a week. In situations of foreign language learning the teacher is often the only native or proficient speaker the student comes in contact with. Students experience a limited range of language discourse rypes. The most typical of these is the Initiation/Response/Evaluation (IRE) a time,

. . . .

. .

exchange where the teacher asks a question, a student answers, and the teacher evaluates the response. The written language students encounter is selected primarily to provide practice with specific grammatical features rather than for its content. Students often feel pressure to speak or write the second language and to do so correctly from the very beginning. Teachers may use the learners' native language to give instructions or for classroom management. \flhen they use the target language, they tend to modify their language in order ro ensure comprehension and

compliance.

LT,l

JoJ slsanbeJ te^a1y\or{ '8ulu¿aru uo sr snf,oJ aql esnEJag 'arll¡e¡d a,r¡t -EJrunuruoc ul pa8z8ua ere lar¡f uaq./v\ sJoJJe s(Jal{fo I{rEe lf,eJJoJ l¡rra,ro ol lou pual sruepnrs 'tuJoJ JJAo pezrsEqdrua sl Sutuearu pue :Ieqf,¿el aqrSo ued eql uo uonf,errof, roJreJo tunorue parrurrl

"

tt.lltj* .

snoauoJJe seruuaruos pue pagl¡drurs qlr^/r\ Jar{lo r{f"a apyrord ,r.rrp.rg 'Eulpe.r6 lp.rnlrnrls g8norgr uer{l rJrlter 'se¡nlsa8 pue 'sdord 'sanc IenrxeruorJo esn aqt lq a¡qrsuaqa¡druoc aperu puu paglldruls sl rndul

'uortrsrnbr¿

.

IEJnI¿u

or Jellruls sr lBqr len r ul a8en8ue¡ aqr elnbcr ill^\ sJJuJEel 'Surueatu uo 8ul -snfoJ ur 'ttr{t sr uorrdrunsse aql 'Sururaur rllJEIr ol rapro ur fluo uo pesnf,oJ JJe suJoj I¿3nE{rJruEJg '>Porur -.rred -lo -dno:8 ur se^lasuaqr sluaPnrs eqr Suorue pue sluapnrs pue Jer{feat uea^\req rpoq 'SulueauJo uollef,Iunururof aqr uo sl slsegdrua Jr{r (uonJnJrsul pJseq-rueluof, pue alltef,Iunruruol uI

sSalaas 1?aouJnu.sat a ntTsJtunrautoJ uJ 'slxeluof uolllsrnbcr IEJnlEu 3o ¡ecrdÁ aJour esoql qll^\ uon3nJlsur pas"g-eJntlnJls Jo sJItsIJal -f,¿rer{f, er{r Jo aruos are¡dar or rg8nos a EI{ sarurue;Sord Sulgcear a8rn8uu¡ e^rltorunruruo: 3o srau8rsaq'sanbtuqlar pue spoqraru Sutgcear a8en8ue¡ Jreql ur sraqf,Eal aprn8 reqr sa¡drcurrd eqrJo sural ul raJP oslt stuoorsselJ 'selqerJt^ raqro lueru put 'Sutureel JoJ alqEII" B arun Jo lunoure 3I{1 'sluaP -nts eqr Jo uolrtllrotu pu" a8e aqr 'luaruuoJltua ¡errslqd aql Jo stuJal uI ragrp Surur€al roJ suolllpuoo aql 'a>llle ]lB lou aJE surooJsse¡r a8en8uel

¿

iJrr v

t(7A(4

-F=-

f,= a>t4rJry,

eq+

q ?Otr

aúv

7S¡tw

,t¡efea|

sntd¿n fi1i.rou ,q!

lr¡l{rtr 'gtrn

Cro.1¡xea

ffi2rñmrrrahl ruoo$solr a7an&ual yuoras aqt ut Surqtaal pua Surutaal Suxnasqo

l28

Obseruing learning and teaching in the second langaage classroom as implicit feedback. Negotiating for meaning the need to say something in a differenr way. Learners usually have only limited time for learning. In a typical teacherfronted classroom with 25-30 students, individual students get very little opportuniry to produce language in a 60-minute class, and when they do, it is usually in the form of a short response to a teacher's question. \lhen students work in pairs or groups, they have opportunities to produce and respond to a greater amount and variery of language. Sometimes, however, subject-matter courses taught through the second language can add time for language learning. A good example of this is in immersion programmes where most or all the subject marter is taught to a group of students who are all second language learners. As in structure-based instruction, it is usually only the teacher who is a proficient speaker. Learners have considerable exposure to the interlanguage of other learners, particularly in student-student interaction. This naturally contains errors that would not be heard in an environment where the interlocutors are native speakers, but it provides many more opportunities for students to use the target language than is the case in most teacher-fronted activities. A variery of discourse rypes may be introduced through stories, peerand group-work, the use of 'authentic' materials such as newspapers and television broadcasts. Text materials may include both those modified for second language learners and those intended for native speakers. In the latter case, teachers use instructional strategies to help learners get the meaning, even if they do not know all the words and structures. In student-student interaction, learners may practise a range of sociolinguistic and functional features of language through role-play. There is little pressure to perform at high levels of accuracy, and there is often a greater emphasis on comprehension than on production, especially in the early stages of learning. Modified input is a defining feature of this approach to instruction. The teacher makes every effort to speak to students in a level of language they can understand. If students speak the same first language, they may have little difficulry in understanding each other. If they come from different language backgrounds, they may modify their language as they

clarification may ser'''e

o

.

.

. .

may help students

see

seek to communicate successfully.

General descriptions of classroom instruction such as those above cannot capture the individual characteristics of particular classrooms. For this reason, researchers have developed a number of ways to study classroom learning and teaching.'W'e will discuss two approaches to classroom research in this chapter.'Sl'e will look first at observation schemes, in which researchers anticipate the occurrence of particular events and behaviours and make note of them within pre-planned frameworks or checklists. Then we will

6T,t

q3eoJdd¿ Jrar{r ur JeJIp rEI{r suooJsself, uJo{ arrlof, sldufsuBJl aql'uollfBJelul tuapnts-Jar{f,Ear ruasaJd o,l\t rsJU aI{I 'uonf,as Suvtro¡o3 al{l Pue sgt ut uaru8 ruooJSSEIf, a8en8uq puof,esJo std¡rcsuert JnoJ Luo{ srdraoxE

eff uortfrJatur

suotlJp¿a|u?

|u"pn|

s-.¿a q J?aJ : suost¿?

dutoz uto o¿swl J 'sluaPnls

PUE

sluaPnls uee \leq Pu" sruePnls Pu? sJer{f,Eal u3e \leg uollfsJelul Jo eJnl"u aqt azrJaloereqf, or eruaqos ITOf, el{r uI pasn esoqt or rcl¡uls sal¡o8ale¡ paurruJerep-a.rd 3o lJs E esn ot pe1se a¡¿ nol glll{¡a ul &l¡tlcr u" sI

^\olag

'seuo pef,uarredxaSo luarudo

-la^ap ¡euorssajord eql uI pu" sJel{f,"el ,&euJo Suru¡e.rt oqr ur Pasn ueag osp e^Er{ seuaqf,s uor}E^Jesqo 'Sulurea¡ aSen8ue¡ puofes uI safuaJeJlP or PalEIeJ a¡e sarll:¿¡d Sulqcear uI sarueJaJlp ,l\oq re >lool ot PePuarul sI IEI{I rlf,JeesaJ ruoorss¿lr ul l¡.rtrurrd pesn uaag e eq tI aIII sraqro PUE stual{f,s JTOI aql 'sJoJf,e (sJauJeal ot puodsar sra

-qf,"ar ,/v\or{ Pue Jar{req^\ PuE '1s3 sJel{f,Ea] suonsanbSo sPuDI aqr 'lertr lue ul pet3rJlsal sr uoltJnpoJd a8en8ue¡ JIaI{r JeI{teI{ \ 'acnpo;d sluePnls a8en8ue¡ (a¡ur¡ rvroq ro) qenu r'toq 'aldurexa ro3 'sluapnls PuE sraqf,Ear fq pacnp -o¡d a8rn8uel elpJo spadse:grcads sequf,seP g ued'uolssnrsrP;o; scrdor eql asoor{f, ol sruepn}s JoJ selllunlJoddo e¡¿ eJaql Jerpeq.,'r Pu" '8utu¿atu Jo tuJoJ a8en8ue¡ uo sr snloJ aqt Jer{raqa'panuac-rauJrel Jo -JeI{J¿al eJ¿ sanrAItJE ¡errSo8epad elp Jaqral{^\ 'a¡dtuexe JoJ 'PJoraJ utf Ja^Jasgo eqt 'y tre¿ Sulsn uar¡6 'sadÁ lrlrrrrf,E Jo uollezlu¿8¡o pue 'snco3 'lualuoc 3o surral ur sarrl¡r¡d Surgrear saglJrs:P Vu¿d 'surd oruu olur PaPhIP sl I-IO:) 'G661r{r1r{grC EIrEW pue epedS eur¡ lq PaqlrsseP aruel{f,S uonelresqo

OfOC) Surgceal

a8rnSuel Jo uoltetuelro elll?slunruruoJ aql sI suloor

-ssr¡o aBenBuEI puo3as .roj l¡pcglcads pado¡a,rap Jruer{f,s

e

jo a¡druexa euo

'sSurprocar qlnsJo sld¡lcsuen ro s8utptorar oapr^ Jo orpne aslpua ot urooJssell agl ePISlno JatEI Pasn Jo 'luooJssell eql ul are laqr allq^ ,erult IeaJ, uI sJa^Jasqo lq pasn arr farp JeIFaq \ 01 uoll -elar ur reJlp osp seluer{f,s ar[L .uorlfErelur uroorsse¡c io saldruEs pel3elas uo Jo uossel e rnog8noJql Pasn are laqr J3qrel{ \ put 'suotldufseP eAIlEl -gruenb Jo e^IlElII¿nb uo snroj faqr raqreqz\t 'uleluoc fagr sarro8alm Jo raqunu agr Surpn¡cu¡ 'sl:adsat pre^as ul raJIP lagl 'sruoo;sse1c a8en8uel fuelt¡ puof,as ur asn JoJ padola,l,ap ueaq e^Er{ soruer{Js uolle^resqo ruareglP

seueqJs uorls Jasgo 'suonrtcadxa ¡o sarro8ateo paunuratepa;d lu¿ ot uoltelJasgo aqt IIUII ol lou Sutl¡l rng 'sdrgs -uonEIoJ put suraued ro3 Sunlool 'ruooJssels eI{} ur suaddeq req^\ aqlJf,seP or ra^resqo aqt salnbar trgr rprordde ue 'fgderSouqra ruoorssrls 13 >lool u,tol$sap a7an&uq puotas aql m &utcltaal puu Sututual &um'tasqg

r30

Obseruing learning and teaching in the second knguage ckssroom

to second language teaching; one ofthem represents structure-based instruction; the other, a communicative approach. Structure-based approaches emphasize language form through either metalinguistic instruction (for example, grammar translation) or patern practice (for example, audiolingual). 'S7'ith

each transcript, there is a chart where you can indicate whether certain things are happening in the inreraction, from the point ofview of the teacher and that of the students. Before you begin reading the transcripts, study the following interpretations of the categories used in the charts:

I

Errors: Are there errors in the language ofeither the teacher or the students? make errors, do they receive feedback?

2 Feedback on errors: \7hen students

From whom? questions: Do teachers and students ask questions to which they

3 Genuine 4

dont know the answer in advance? Display questions: Do teachers ask questions that they know the answers to so that learners can display their knowledge of the language (or lack of it)?

5 Negotiation for meaning: Do the teachers stand what the other speakers are saying?

and students work to underefforts are made by the

'S7'hat

teacher? By the students?

6 Metalinguistic

comments: Do the teachers and students talk about language, in addition to using it to transmit information?

In the following excerpts, T represents the teacher; S represents a student. (The first two examples come from unpublished data collected by P M. Lightbown, N. Spada, and B. Barkman.) Classroom A: A structure-based approach (Students in this class are 15-year-old French speakers.)

Teacher

Student

Errors Feedback on errors

Genuine questions Display questions

Negotiation for meaning Metalinguistic comments Photocopiable @ Oxford University Press

r

OK, we finished the book-we finished in the book Finished.'S7'orkbook

l,

UnitI,2,3.

2, 3. So today we're going to start with

r8,r

'rooP eql asolc ¿8urop eq sI rEI{/v'

'apnEIJ ¿PrEuraB 'asrald rooP aqr aso¡o nof Ppo^'(preoq ar¡r uo Buúe1d ru,I, sellJ^\) ¡osz¡a ¡nol qrv'r 3uúe1d er¡oÁ

,rtt"rt 7*'qt¡,r.

'ser\.

'Pallrxe eJ1el lrrop 'taf qooq rnof a>1el luoc llun ruoo¿ssryr aSon&ual puoeas aql ut Sutt¡taal

pur &urutaa1 Sumtasqg

132

Obseruing learning and teaching in the second knguage classroom

r

He is closing the door (writes 'He's closing the door' on the board). \lhat are you doing, Mario?

Classroom B: A communicative approach (Students in this class are 10-year-old French speakers. In this activiry they are telling their teacher and their classmates what 'bugs' them. They have written what bugs them' on a card or paper that they hold while speaking.) Teacher

Student

Errors Feedback on errors

Genuine questions Display quest¡ons

Negotiation for meaning Metalinguistic comments Photocopiable @ Oxford University Press

s T s T s T s r

s

It bugs me when a bee string me. Oh, when a bee stings me. Stings me. Do you get stung often? Does that happen often? The bee stinging many times? Yeah.

Often? (Teacher turns to students who aren't paying attention) OK. Sandra and Benoit, you may begin working on a research project, hey? (Teacher turns her attention back to'\(/hat bugs me') It bugs me (inaudible) and my sister put on my clothes. Ah! She borrows your clothes? \lhen you're older, you may appreciate it because you can switch clothes, maybe. (Tirrns to check another studentt written work) Mélanie, this is yours, I will checkOK. It's good. It bugs me when I'm sick and my brother doesnt help me-my-my brother,'s¿115s

T

s T s

fig-rne-.

OK. You know-when (inaudible) sick, you're sick at home in bed and you say, oh, to your brother or your sister: '\7ould you please get me a drinkof¡y¿¡s¡:'-'Ah! Drop dead!'you know, 'Go play in the traffic!'You know, it's not very nice. Martin! It bug me to haveIt bugs me. It bugzzme. It bugs me when my brother takes my bicycle. Every day.

€,tr

'sluaPnls 3rl1 ruoü suonsanb oN 'lueura8?u¿ur ruooJ :suorlsr"O r"ll;l n

-sselr 01 pereler slez*¡e lsorulp rre

laql tnq

^

aJ B lsrt uollef,IunuruJoo rsJg Jqr uI 'Jal{lo I{fEa aJ? uonJEJalul luePnls-luaPnrsJo slduf,su¿J] o/yu asaql

ruo5 luaJeJrp,fta,r

'urro3 rg8rr aql pug ol Surl¡t uo

sn:oj laqr se a8en8uel rnoge 8uq¡rt eJE stuapnts ar{t ',unouo:d, lo ,gla,t, ert lagr q8noqrry :sruJuruJof, clrsln8ul¡era¡lq 9 sE r{f,ns spJo^\ Sulsn lou 'l¿s ot ruer'r fagr paar8e a,r lagt rrqrvt les or sruJoJ tJaJJoc aqr Sursn arr faqr Jalpaq/ú.Jo uorssn3slP aJotu 'sI lEI{l 'tuJo3 'Aots al{rJo rueruof aql uo paa.r8e azttg 3o uoneno8au aJoru sr aJalp 'snql sluapnls er{l (uortfrJarul aql u¡ ru¡od sq1 rV :Suluearu JoJ uoItEIloStN 5

utootssqr aSan&ual puoJas aof w Sutqnal puu Sututaal &un"¿asqO

r40

Obseruing learning and teaching in the second language classroom

language learning. They adjusted some of the categories to fit their data, and they also developed additional categories. This resulted in the identification of six corrective feedback types, defined below The definitions are taken from Lyster and Ranta (1997: pp.46-8). The examples come from i0-1 1-year-old students in ESL classes that we have observed.

Explicit correction refers to the explicit provision of the correcr form. As the teacher provides the correct form, he or she clearly indicates that what the student had said was incorrect (for example, 'Oh, you mean ...', 'You should say

s T

...').

The dog run fastly. 'Fastly' doesnt exist. 'Fast' does not take -ly. That's why I picked

'quickly'. involve the teachert reformulation of all or part of a studentt utterance, minus the error. Recasts are generally implicit in that they are not introduced by'You mean', 'Use this word', or'You should say.'

Recasts

s1 \X/hyyou dont like Marc?

r

\Mhy dont you like Marc?

sz I dont know I dont like him. Note that in this example the teacher does not seem to expect uptake from S 1. It seems she is merely reformulating the question S t has asked 52.

Ckrifcation requests indicate to students either that their utterance has been misunderstood by the teacher or that the utterance is incorrect in some way and that a repetition or a reformulation is required. A clarification request includes phrases such as 'Pardon me ...' It may also include a repetition of the error as in '\7hat do you mean by ... ?'

r s :r s :r s :r s

How often do you wash the dishes? Fourteen. Excuse me. (Clarification request) Fourteen. Fourteen what? (Clarification request) Fourteen for a week. Fourteen times a week? (Recast) Yes. Lunch and dinner.

Metalinguisticfeedbackcontains comments, information, orquestions related to the correctness of the studentt utterance, without explicitly providing the correct form. Metalinguistic comments generally indicate that there is an error somewhere (for example, 'Can you find your error?'). Also, metalinguistic information generally provides either some grammatical terminologv that refers to the nature of the error (for example, 'Itt masculine') or a word definition in the case of lexical errors. Metalinguistic questions also point to

Tr'I

ol srarpo pue (886I) ur¿./v\S IIrrreW pel ser{ Surqrear a8enSue¡ pesrg-luetuoo ulqrr,ry\Jlasrr a8en8uel puoras ar{rJo aSpa¡uou1 Sulcuer¡ua pue algrsuaqa-rd -uror relleur-rcalgns aqr Surleru 3o a8ualpgr elqnop aqt 'peapul 'qceads

JIaIp Jo ruJoJ eqt utr{r Jarp¿J lueluof ar{l or Surpuodsar sr Jar{f,¿at aqt ter{l euJns$ feru laqr asneoeg 'p ssal eJE (ruro3 rou Surueeur uo sr srserldrua atp areqrrr) Surqrear a8en8ue¡ peseq-lueluoc 8ul¡'leca¡ sluepnls regr pan8re s¿q (866I) rars/1

'ef,uerarln ¡rur8lro arpJo ruJoJ palf,arrof, e or peal or fla>¡t aroru os¡e ara,tr.lagl 'a>1erdn eJour ur pelFSeJ dluo tou >1ceqpaa3:lrsrn8urplau pue suonetrfrla 'aJoruJaqlJng 'suoruradal pue (>lregpaaj onsln8ulletatu 'slsenbaJ uon¿f grJEIf JeUE Jnf,f,o or l1a>1r1 a.rour pue slseteJ ;JUE Jnf)o or l¡a>¡1 tsra¡ seru. a¡erdn ruapnts 'uae.4 tag ur IIaJ {reqpaal elnf,rrrorSo sadlr raqto aql 'papl^ -o¡d adlr >llrqpaeJ ruanbarj rs"al eqt se¡a rorra3o uollrada¡ 'sasselr rnoJ ar{r ul papl,ro-rd >llBqPaaj l¿1or aquoJler{ uEqr arou JoJ Pelunof,f,E stse3er 'peepul lleqpaaJJo adlr raqro lue utqr rrou¡ slstf,er pesn pe^Jesqo faqr sasself, uors -reunur qlueJC peseg-tuaruor ar{l ur srer{reel Ip reqr punoJ €rupU pue -rarsll '(eJE

aqt eas noÁ ¿a>lrtsnu.rnol aas

a

^.

Err ¡ern¡d s,rr

ueqr6

¿JoJJe

no¡ ¿rg8lr 'a¡doad o^\t s,rr rng ¿sr e/N ... sl e/N

r s

:uortoaJJof rrcr¡dxe pue

lueuruJof, JnsrngurTeleu

lq

paz'ro¡loJ sr uonrledar aqr 'aldruexa rxau eql

'ruoorPeg aql ur seH 'tuooJPag ¿uooJr{rEg 'ruooJr{rBg ar{r ur :tsEf,al e

fq pa/|o¡oj

sr

s

eH

uI

r s

uorlrledal agr 'a¡durexa srql uI .JOJJE

aqr rgSr¡q8lq or se os uoneuolur Jraql rsnlpe sJer{feel 'sespf, rsoru uI 'af,ue -Jelln snoauoJJe sluepnrs er{tJo uorlnade¡ sJOrlfEa} aqt or snlet uotltlada¿

¿selEld

¿-

eqt su"alf aI{ 'eru 'are1d aqr su"elf,

s

asnlxg r

ragre3lT,q

s

'efueJaltn Jrerp atEInuJoJaJ ot stuapnls 1se l¡¡euorsef,f,o sJaqf,¿el 'prlql '(,¿qs1¡8uE ur x les errr op ^\oH, "' 'a¡druexa .ro3) sruro3 lrarror trrrlr ot suoltsanb esn sJer{frat'puof,as'(,"'" s,r1,'a¡duexa ro3) aouerelln ul\o Jrer{r3o uona¡duoc }rorle sJer{reet 'lsJrC 'stuapnls aql ruoü ruJoJ tf,eJJof, er{t lprarlp ol esn sJer{Jear ter{r sanbluqcat aaJql rwal lE or sJeJeJ uoxl?lxJxlg rrcrTa

P-e

¿rsed agr rnoge >llel

s

a r uarlr* sqre^ uo rnd e-a,r Sulpue ar{r Erer{/6, frp-rarsal a¡doad aqr r€ >lool a/N

r s

'(,¿aulunua; ll sI, 'JIduBxa roj) ]uapnts aqt tuog uonrruJo1ur Jr{r rrorle or tdu¡ane lnq JoJJe arpJo eJnrtu aI{} ruoo$sap a7an&ual puocas aql ut Sutqwal pua &urutaa1 Sumtasqg

r42

Obseruing learning and teaching in the second knguage classroom

conclude that'not all content teaching is necessarily good language teaching' (p. 68). The challenges of content-based language teaching will be discussed

further in Chapter 6. Since Lyster and Ranta reported their findings, many more observation studies of corrective feedback in second or foreign language classrooms have been carried out. Some of them report similar results-that recasts are the most frequently occurring type of feedback and that they appear to go unnoticed by liarners. However, othefs report that learners do notice recasts in the classroom. Below, two studies are described in which learners were observed to notice and to respond to recasts provided by their teachers. Study 2: Recasts andPriaate sqeech learners of Japanese, Amy Ohta (2000) examined the oral language that learners addressed to themselves during classroom activities. She was able to obtain this private speech by microphones to individual students during classroom. interaction

In a study with aduli foreign language

"tt".hitrg that focused or grammar and metalinguistic instruction. In this context'

Ohta discov.r.d ih"t learners noticed recasts when they were provided by the instructor. Furthermore, learners were more likely to react to a recast with private speech when it was directed to another learner or to the whole class iather than when the recast was directed to their own errors. On the basis ofthese findings, she concluded that recasts do get noticed in classroom interaction even iftñey do not lead to uptake from the student who originally produced the error.

Study 3: Recasts in

dffirent instructional

settings

Mori (2006) compared

learners' immediand French Japanese immersion ate responses to used correccontexts cl"rrroornr. They found that the teachers in both tive feedback in similar ways. However, the effects of recasts on learners' uptake were different. In the Japanese immersion classes, learners frequently repaired their utterances after réceiving recasts whereas learners in the French iÁmersion classes rarely did. Instead, the greatest proportion of repair came after prompts, that is, the feedback rypes that indicated to students that a correition was needed and that encouraged them to self-correct'

Roy Lyster and Hiráhide

corrective feedback

in

In their efforts to understand these differences Lyster and Mori carried out a detailed analysis of the instructional characteristics in these classes' Using the COLI observation scheme described above to caPture differences in the pedagogical practices, they discovered that there was an analytic orientation i" thi J""p"tt.t. classrooms leading the teachers and learners to focus their attenti;; on language form and accuracy. The orientation in the French immersion cl"rrei was more experiential with a greater focus on content and communication of messages. Lyster and Mori argued that because the learners' attention was regularly drawn to form, they were primed Japanese

E,'T

'slxaluof, pasnloJ-e8"n8ue¡ uor¡dxa Surrnp l¡ruanbar3 pue'sa8ueqcxe uouefrunruulof, pue 'luarua8eueru 'tueluof, Surrnp paprzrord l¡aJEJ sE^&\ >lJEg -pee3 a rDer¡o¡ trcrTdxa lsa8ueqcxa pasnco3-e8rn8uel rlrr¡dxa ur os ssal rng 'sa8ueg:xa luatuof, pue 'uoDefrununuor 'tuarua8ruetu ur etEJ q8rq l¡rua -lslsuof, E 1B eJa,/v\ slsEfal :slxeluof, ssoJJB Pasn PaIJeA oslE >ll"qPeeJ e^Ilf,eJJof, 'sa8uegcxa tuarua8eueuJ ur Ja au pur 'saSuegcxa 3o sadlr arp 'l¡Sunsaratul uonef,runuJuof, pue luetuol ur euJn arp Jo auros fpo 'sa8uegrxa pasnf,oJ -a8rn8url ucr¡dxa unplzr'uauo lsorrl tndrnorlagr paglporu sJaur¿elter{t punoJ leqr 'lceqpaal J noerro3 er{r ot peDear sraureel ,4aoq peurru¿xa fagr uar1t\ 'luarua8eueru pue 'uorte3runururoo 'tuatuor lq pa.d{olloJ 'sa8uegoxa pesnJoJ -a8en8ue¡ trclTdxa aqr ul ruanbeu tsoru sB^\ rl terll lnq stxatuoo leuonfnJtsur 'txatuor srr{t ur lse IIE ur papr^o¡d sr¡* >lleqpeal rer{t punoJ sreqrreesar er{I -tear3 a;am >lleqpeal JoJ senrunlJoddo snql 'sa8ueqrxa uourrrunuruol eql ur srorra a;ou l¡luecgluS¡s pacnpord sraur¿Jl leql puno3 laryery pue Ja^rTO

put

'l8o¡ounural rltsln8ur¡etaru Jo esn eql JEturuBJB uo s¿ztr srseqdrua agr :saSueqoxe pesnf,o;-e8en8ue¡ trcr¡dxa 7

pue'sle,,rr p;Surueau ur r¡srÉug Sursn stuepnls uo se,l\ srseqdrua aqr :sa8uegcxa uorlef,runuruo3 g Jnor^Eqeg uooJSSEIf, atel¡do¡dd¿ pue uossel er{rJo uonea.ueBrc eqr rnoqe pe>llrl JaI{JEat aqr :sa8uerpxa tuarua8eueru ¿ uJnlnfrJJnf, ar{rJo luaruof er{r lnogE suonsanb pa>lse ro a8pa¡mou1 parredur raqf,Ber agr :sa8uegcxa lueruoJ I -uapr

laql

:PalsEJalur sJeuJBel PUE sJaqf,Eal qrlqlA uI slxeluof, JnoJ Pa5Il 'uossal e ur uonf,eJetur JoJ stxatuoo Sull¡e,r uo Sulpuadap pararglp

lleqpaal eAnJaJJoJ Jo asn (sJeuJeel pue uorsrlo.rd ,sragreal Jer{taq,&\ pare8lr -sa,rul lar¡1 'sp¡o-real-¿I-9 qll¡a uroorsselr 1gg lrerurrd uerprrsny ue 3o lpnrs a,r¡rdrrf,sap e lno perrrer (t00d lapeyrq uosllv pue ra^IIO Epuoq¿ qnqpaalanqra.uo) :, [pnts Trcaluor m

dplcr¡dxa eJoru ruroJ or uorlualle rrer{r srf,eJrp rer{r >lleqpaal paeu tuaruorTSulueeru uo pasnf,oJ sI tBr{l uorlf,nJtsur zl e^ref,al oq,ry\ sJauJEal lEql aq PFolv\ sII{lJo aldruexa aug 'luaruuoJr^ue Fuon)nJlsur Jrar{l ur ol Peuolsnf,f,E auof,eq a,req laqr lEllv\ o1 alsoddo sr terll uonf,aJrp e ur petuerJo eJe sJauffelJl pallrou eg or l1a>¡t a;oru sr 1reqpaa; 'srsar¡rodlq sr{t 01 Surproccy 'srsar¡rodfq ef,u"Iegralunof, eql asodo¡d ol rrory pue.rarsr(1 pel r{rreeser raqlo tuog asoqr

put s8ulpug asaq¡

'pres prq laqr rtr{ l,Jo uoneruJ5uor e l¡duls stlrr lsef,eJ (sJerlf,Eal aql reqr porunsst sJeuJeal sr snql ro¡¡a a8¿n8ue¡ e or Sulpuodsa¡ s¿rv' ¡al{reet aql tel{l reuJeel

reqr l¡eryt

arp or ¡eu8ls or f1a>1r¡ ssa¡ aJolü slsef,al ta^a,&\oq 'sosself, uolsJeunul qlueJg paluarro-Surueeu¡ eJoru eql uI 'slsEJaJ Jo uonf,unJ a^Itf,eJJof, el{r erlrou ol Moo¿ssqr a3an3ua1 yuotas atp ur Sutc¡trat yua &urutaa1 Sum.tasqg

r44

Obseruing learning and teaching in the second language classroom

Oliver and MackeÉ study emphasizes how differences in the insrructional context affect teachers'feedback and learners' response to it. It is also important to keep in mind that different corrective feedback rypes can be interpreted differently depending on how they are delivered. Recasrs are a case in point. In a study of corrective feedback in four different instructional contexts, Younghee Sheen (2006) observed many conrrasting rypes of recasts, including recasts that were declarative versus interrogative, reduced versus non-reduced, single words or short phrases versus long phrases or clauses. Recasrs can also differ according to whether they are delivered with or without stress or emphasis. In a study of adult learners of English, Shawn Loewen and Jenefer Philp (2006) found that recasts containing 'prosodic thirteen times more likely to result in successful uptake' (p. 547), that is, uptake in which the student produced the corrected form. However, these interactions were not associated with improved performance on a sub-

stress were

sequent test.

Other factors that may affect learners' reacrions to different rypes of feedback include age and learning goals. For example, adults may be more likely to interpret recasts as feedback on language form, particularly if a high level of accuracy in the second or foreign language is one of their goals.

In this chapter we have examined the role of correcrive feedback primarily in terms of learners' oral production. Most of this research has been concerned with the effects ofcorrective feedback in relation to learners' linguistic growth and more specificall¡ learners' grammatical development. There is also an extensive body ofresearch that has investigated the role ofcorrective

feedback on learners'written production. This research has been primarily concerned with whether corrective feedback can help learners improve their writing performance. Less atrention has been given to whether and how written corrective feedback contributes to learners' linguistic development. One recent study which has done that is Younghee Sheen's research described in Study 5 below.

Study 5: Oral

anduritten correctiuefeedbach

Younghee Sheen (2010) compared the effects oftwo types oforal andwritten' corrective feedback on adult ESL learners' accurare use ofarticles. The oral

corrective feedback consisted of recasts or metalinguistic information; parallel written corrective rypes were direct correcrion or direct metalinguistic feedback. Five groups participated in the stud¡ of which one was a controll group. The other groups each received one of the following: 1) oral recasrs,i 2) oral metalinguistic feedback, 3) written direct correction, and 4) writteni direct metalinguistic feedback.

I

I

All groups participated in rwo 30-minute activities in which theywere askedl to t."d rtory ,.tell it either in the written or the oral mode. Learners] " ".rJth.n in the oral corrective feedback group received either recasts or metalinguisticl

9I7I

'peetsul 'JeuJEel agrSo r,red aqt uo tJoJa a,uluSoc a¡rrr1 arrnba; tegt sasuodsar a¡drurs ']ror{s ot peal or rq8nor¡r a;r larp asnereg suonsenb le¡dsrp ra^{g asn or pa3.rn ueag a^Eq sJar{ftel 'Surqceat a8enSue¡ elnefrunururor Jo lxatuo) aqt uI'suonsanb le¡dsrpJo sragtunu.reqSry l¡areuon¡odo.ldslp pruodar osle eAEr{ Jnor^eqaq Suruonsanb ,srar¡ceat uo sarpnls ruooJSsEIJ rarpo 'lpnrs oreg pue 3uo1 aql erurs pa8uego a^Eq spoqraru Surgceat a8en8uel q8noqr uarE r.uooJSSEIrJo eJnrrnJls IEeJ ar{l ur

tuap.rrnba

-rer1f,Bot terp

'pa8ueq: aq pporls uontsJe^uol lruonreJetur aqt ter{t panSre laqr pua'(rBZ 'd) ,p¡.ro,,'r str

Jo uorsJel peuotsrp l¡rear8, e sr uonreJalur JauJeal

papnlruor sreqrJeesar erll 'suonsanb feldsrp uegr

ruanba.r3

aJour eJo \ suoltsanb IEItuaJaJeJ 'ruooJsself, erp aprstno suonesJaluoc raleads a^rteu-uou/ra>pads elrleu erp uI 'suonsanb uorteruJoJur ueqt suortsanb ,(r¡dslp eroru pelse srer{ieel rtqt pape^eJ sesselr -ISE llnpr xrs ur stuapnts pue sJeqleet uaa^\teq suonf,eJalur erp jo apeiu s8urpJof,eJ orpnv 'suon -sanb (.plrueJeJaJ, ;o ,eurnua8,) ,uoneuro3ur, pup ,f"ldr1p,3o lrrruenb aqr uJe \taq saf,ueJaglp ur pelsaratur f¡-relnclrrrd era,ulagl 'sra>1eads elnru-uou pue e rleu uee^llag uooJsself, eql aplslno pa^Jesgo sJnoIAEI{eg Suluonsanb qtvur uaqr pa.reduoc pue sruooJSSEIr -ISE ur srar{f,eJl lq palse suonsanblo suonrunJ pue sruroJ eqr pauru?xa (EB6I) orES auelreq3 pue 3uo1 ¡aeqor¡¡ sutoorssryz TS'I u! suot$anb.staqrual:9 [pn6

raqunu E ur peururExe ueaq sEI{ uol}rErarul uroorss'¡c ur leld td',ttot:tj.]| '(.te,lsue eqt.{\ou>I lou l¿u Jar{feat er{r qlry./ü ot) suonsanb .plluata3er, ro ,eulnua3, pur (rarvrsue aql sr'rorDf lpear¡r Jarlf,Eat eqr lprq^! or) suonsanb ,l"ldrlP, se ot PerraJar aff Paurlusxa llarrrsuatxe uaeg arcq lBr{1 suo¡lsanblo sadlr orrr¿'purlsJepun lagr gonu trog Surroldxa ur pue uollf,EJetul uI stuep -nrs 8uÉe8ue ur letueruepunJ eJE suousan$ 'stuooJssel3 a8en8uel puofes uI r{f,fteseJJo pep poo8 e;o sn3oJ er{r ueeq seq rnol^Er{eg Sutuonsanb ,sraqcra¿

utoolswp aql

u?

suot$anb '(ryeqpaa3

rnsln8ur¡etaur snsJel stsecar) >l3eqpaal a nreJJof aIFJo sseurlcr¡dxa aqr uEI{r lueuodrul ssal sr papr^ord sl ¡cuqpJeJ a^Ilf,aJJoo riJII{.^a ul (uautrrvr snsJa^ 'stsal-tsod ¡e.ro) runlpau eqt trr{r of,uapr^a se sSulpug asarp sla;d;etul ueeqs pefe¡ap pue ertrperurur IIE uo dno¡8 lorruof, el{r peuroJredrno fpuergru8rs 'stsp)eJ I"Jo pa^refer ler{l euo er{r JoJ ldecxa 'sdno¡8 ilVr'lsel uoI}faJJoJ-JoJJa uB put 'e neueu ualllJld E 'uonetf,rp Pepeads e papnlf,ul slsal aI{I 'JarEI $lee^\ V-e ute?e pue 'tuaruleeJr er{t .rage f¡atelparulur 'tuaruleaJl leuonf,nJlsul eql aJoJag petsal sE1!\ salfnJe Jo a8payrroul rlagr 'fpoarrof salJnJB asn ol Áilq" .rraqr pa,ro.rduJr sJeuJEal Jeqler{^\ euluJaleP oI 'Ja13l slep omr sJoJJe elf,IlJ¿ JoJ suonf,eJJof, r{lv![ seAI]EJJBu JIeIp pa^ref,a¡ l¡ols Jql a]oJ1d ol{1v\ sJeuJEe'I drors aqr Ploler laqr a¡q,,'r Jorra el3rlft ue aPE1¡ laqr arurr lra.,'a >1ceqpaa3 ruoo$spp aSun&ual puotas acp ur Suuytual yua &urutaa1 Sutatasqg

\46

Obseruing learning and teaching in the second language classroom

they have been encouraged to ask more referential (or genuine) questions since the latter are thought to require more cognitive processing and to generate more complex answers. More recentl¡ howeve¡ a re-evaluation of display quesrions has taken place. This is based on the observation that there are differentways inwhich display questions can be asked in classrooms. One is for the teacher to ask a series of questions in a drill-like format such as 'Do you have a brother?', 'Does he have a brother?', 'Do you have a sister?', 'Does she have a sister?' In this context, display questions do not have a meaningful or communicative purpose. In other contexts, however, display questions can serve important pedagogic and interaction functions. The study below describes reachers' use of display questions in a more positive light.

Sr"dy 7:

Scffi lding and dispky

and referential questions class, Dawn McCormick and Richard Donato (2000) explored how the teacher's questions were linked to her instructional goals. \X/orking within sociocultural theor¡ the researchers chose the concept of scaffolding to investigate teacher questions as 'mediational tools within the dialogue between the teacher and students' (p. 184). As we saw in Chapter I and Chapter 4, scaffolding refers to a process in which, for example, a more knowledgeable (or expert) speaker helps a less knowledgeable (or novice) learner by providing an inreractional framework that the learner can build on.

In a case study of one teachert adult ESL

McCormick and Donato identified six functions of scaffolding (for example, drawing the novicet attention to the task, and simpli$'ing or limiting the task demands). The researchers examined another function-the teacher's use of questions during scaffolded interactions-and how it contributed to class participation and learner comprehension. In the example below, they argue that the teacher's use of the display question *Who usually lives in palaces?' serves an important pedagogic function because it draws the learners' attention to the word palace' through the display question and facilitares the learners' comprehension of the word.

T

Palace?

1 Like castle? s2 Special place, verygood. s

s: r

ss

r

ss s4

r

Very nice.

\7ho usually lives in palaces? Kings. Kings, and queens, princes and princesses. Castle, special place, very nice.

Yeah

Maybb beautiful house? Big, beautiful house, yeah, really big.

LIrl

.Psureel eq or ,sJa1v\sue

IrrJeleru aqt Sulssaro¡d lllnJssef,f,ns aJoru pue 'seepr rlaql Surpurdxa .ra¡n3 Surpl,ro;d sruapnts or peel uEf, ef,uEIEg rg8l.r agr Surpug ,uoll¡n¡lsur

Jo sPuDI luaraJlP ur Pu" s¡a,,'a¡ a8e ruereJlP le sluaPus qlr-&t stuoorssElt uI '(lge t '¡e ra 3uo1) suorlsenb leldsrp¡pasolc rpr.tr pared -uro) suonsanb pnuara3arTuado ql,u:a8uo.ns eg ot pe Jesqo ueeg s¿q rf,aga srgr 'l¡Sulsrrdrns ro¡ 'xeldruoc eJoru pue ra8uo¡ osle eJE sasuodsa¡ Jrar{t tng a)npotd sruapnrs op f¡uo lou 'suonsenb or puodsal ot eurrl sasuodsa¡ aJou

eJoru sluJpnts Jrer{l a,r.r8 ot paurcJt aJe sJar{3eer uaq,tr reqt u./\^.oqs seq r{JJ¿eseU

pJE^r>I.,taE

'a8ua¡erp per e ag or sureas sef,uells Sullea¡r pue fplcrnb puodsar ot sluapnts uo a¡nssa.rd r{f,nru oor

Sulce¡d uaal\taq aruEIEq

e

Surpurg 'uorlJnJlsur e^npf,runuJurof ur Jnff,o osle

,bqr 'sasse¡r pnSurlolpne3o ¡ecrdlr a¡e su¡allBd ra¡asue/uonsanb prde.r qcns g8nogr¡y 'asuodsa¡ E al¿Fruro3 ol luepnrs ar{t roJ ue-Lr l¡rua¡rs ueqr rer{rrr saun IEJeAas uorlsanb aqr asen¡drred ¡o leada¡ ot pepual os¡e laql 'sa las -ruaqr uo¡tsanb erp paJeasue Jo luapnls Jer{loue ol uonsanb eqt perf,eJrp fagr aroSaq o,&\.1 Jo puof,es B utrll aJouJ ou stuepnls a,re8 l¡eordlr sJar{f,Eel leqr punoJ laql 'sasse¡i TSg pn8ul¡orpne ur eu¡n lre^\Jo srsl¡eue e^nelll -uenb e plp (786I) u.anoqtq8rl lsre¿ pue arrq r euueof 'puodsa.r ol aulrl luapnls agr ar'r8 ot uonsanb E pe>lsB Sur,reg rage sasned Jar{f,Eel aqr elun Jo lunoru" eql-(aurrJ JrB,r\, sr Jnor^Er{Jg Suluollsanb (sJer{f,eeuo lcadse ragrouy san4tutdSuquo4sanb ,s,taqr?at Fu? auft ry?/l¡:6 [pryS 'rer{f,Eal aqr3o rred aqr uo a8en8ue¡ u8larol Jql ur a¡uatadtuocJo le^el ,{31,{ sa¡¡nba¡ uor}f,EJalur asuodsa;Tuolrsanb3o " srqr r¿gr rnq suroorsself,'IIT3 esew ur sJauJ¿el l5auaq PIno \ suo¡lsanb 13^31 uado xa¡druo) erour 8uu1se t¿ql pJpnlf,uof, ragnd-uorpq 'satuof,rno cpsln8 -ur1 xa¡duof, tsour eq¡ or pel suoneue¡dxa .ro suoseal JoJ osle rng sDeJ JoJ tsnl rou sJauJral pa>lse tBr{t suollsanb uado 'uonrppe uI 'suonsanb uado rarye rndrno 3o ll¡enb pue ónurnb ¡area¡8 e parnpo-rd sluapnts 'uagr or a,rr8 stuepnls sasuodsa¡ aqr sE IIaa sE 'sreqf,Eet qsrpug lq pals" suonsanbjo sadlr

aql paprorer orpne pue pe^resgo (9002) ra5nd-uorleq euerrsur{J 'er.rlsny ur sess¿lr (fIfC) Euru.rea¡ palre.rEalu¡-aEen8ue¡ pup luatuoc u1 'Suruosear pu? uoneut¡dxa 'a¡druexa ro3 '8urpn¡f,ur 'sJa^\sue xaldruor JJoru pue ra8uo¡ or Sulpra¡ f¡ecldlr 'uoneroqela etllur pue Je./v\sur a¡qrssod auo uer{l aJoru e ?q suonsenb uadg 'or puodsar ol lsea pue 1:lnb ruaqr Sunpru 'sasuodsa.¡ pro,lt-auo a¡durs ot peal l¡ensn lerp pue reldsu¿ a¡qrssod auo l¡uo ar'eq Á1pcÁ'h suorrsanb pasolC 'suo¡tsenb pasolf, pue uado uaa.&\tag teql sr suon -sanb aulnua8 pue le¡dslp uaa^uag euo aqt ot rplnuls uorlrurlsrp raqtouv suousanb pasqt ?u? uado :g [pus 'uonf,EJetur Jo uossel;e¡ncurd e ur s¡eo8 sJal{f,Eal 3I{r or ef,uaJgeJ I{1I1r\ Pu" uollf,"Jelul PaPIoJ€JsJo >lJo^/v\3IUEry aI{] uqlLv\ peurru¿xa eq ppoqs suollsanb regt tsa8Sns ol¿uoq pue >llrruro3Jry utoottsryr a8un&uq puotas aql ur &wo¡tnat pua Sututaal Sum.tasqg

148

Obseruing learningand teaching in the second langudge classroom

Study 10: Tirnefor learning langaages in school Earlier in this chapter we talked about the differences between learning a second language in the natural setting compared with the classroom (see Thble 5.1). One of the major differences is the amount of time available for learning. In the natural sefting there is ample time to learn whereas in the typical classroom setting, learners have limited time. One of the ways to

;

second/foreign language is via content-based instruction. However, this is not always feasible or desirable (Lightbown 2Ol2). Other alternatives include increasing the total instructional time or distributing time more intensively over the school year.

provide more time for learning

a

!íe know that it takes a great deal of time to learn

a second language, but little research has been done to investigate how the distribution of instructional time affects L2 learning. Exceptions to this include the work of some Canadian researchers who have examined different amounts and distribu-

tions of time in English and French as a second language programmes. In one study in Quebec, learners receiving intensive ESL instruction for five hours every day for five months of one school year (in Grade 5 or 6) were compared to learners at the end of secondary school who had received the same total amount of instruction spread over 7-8 years of schooling. On a number of measures, the students who received the intensive instruction performed as well as or better than those whose instruction was delivered in what has been called a 'drip feed' approach (Lightbown and Spada 1994) '

In subsequent research, comparisons were made between grouPs of Grade 5 and 6 students who participated in intensive English language instruction during a single school year, but with the time distributed differently: some students received five hours of English a day for five months; others received the same total number of hours, doing two and a half hours of English each day for 10 months. The researchers found that both groups benefited from the overall increase in hours of instruction with some additional advantages for learners receiving the more intensive instruction (Collins et al. 1999; Collins and \X/hite 2011). The advantages were evident not only in superior language abilities but also in attitudes toward the language and satisfaction with language learning experiences. Similar findings have been reported for different models of intensive and core French programmes (Netten and Germain 2004;Lapkin, Hart, and Harley 1998). The classroom observation studies we have described in this chapter focus on specific features ofclassroom interaction. In these studies, the feature of interest was determined in advance of the observation on the basis of some hypothesis about what aspects of classroom instruction and interaction are important for learning, that is, whether a particular type of corrective feedback led to more learner repair, whether a particular type of question led to more learner output, and how the distribution of time affected learning

6rr

Sulssa¡dxa 'looqfs re sacual¡adxe u-/ro :larp Surlerrrod lla,rrre8au srua¡rd pepnlrur eruoq lE acual¡adxa uonezrlerlos a8rn8ue¡ suarplrqr eqr 3o ued ,(¡ruapl,tg ''irr-1d rc sJotrEJ lerluangur aroru ,raqto palealal txetuor leJntlnf puE lErros aqr3o srslpuE rapEorq E 'arnllBJ suarplrr{r aql ot sJolf,EJ Surrnq¡rr -uof aJelr\ sanssl aBenBuEI esaql q8noqrry .gsr18uE jo uorsJe^ lf,arJoJur ueuo pue pal:rrtsar e qtr.&\ paceldar sez'r a8enSu¿l tsrg rrer{I .looqls ur aSen8uel ]sJg suaJPlrql er{rJo asn ou s?./v\ aJeql .Sulllas Iooqf,s puB e(uoq aql uaa \taq sanlel pu¿ asn a8enSuel ur seruareglp lueru paJalorun slslpue pelretap V 'loor{3s ul pallt3 uerplrql er{rJo requnu a3rc1 E ,ssalar{trele¡ .ruarudo¡a,rap a,rrrruSoc pur clrsln8ur¡ qrog ro3 SurreFluns puE r{f rJ eJe,e\ lEr{t stuauJuoJr^ua 'looqls eqr ur pur eruor{ 3r{1 ur sacrlle¡d PalEe^eJ seuoq eqt ur suon?^Jasgo 'spuEIsI uoruolos eqr ur ser¡rue3 auru gum sreal asn-e8en8uel ar{S pa-roldxa fpnr e tno parrr€f, (2661oa8eg-uosre¿¡ uere) ¡eu¡pnr¡8uol Iooqrs pu? auoq aqt u? a3an3ua7 :I I t?n$ Iere^as ra,ro

'adornE ur auo puE 'let Ja Jasqo Jr{t 'peersul 'sal¡oSalec peuruJeteperd3o ras E tnoqtt.&\ suJooJSSEIf a8enSuel uSlaroj .ro puores ul Sururea¡ pue Surgrear Sunresqolo ferrr e sr fgderSouqtg

fqderSourpg 'Sulurea¡ a8en8ue¡ puof,as;o3 s8untas puoncn.nsur 8ur -taJdJalur pue Surgl.rcsap or qreordde ruaraglp E 01 uJnl .,'rou e/N .saurof,tno

ruoo$sqr aSon&ual puotas aql ut Suto¡taal pua &uruna1 Sumtasqg

150

Obseruing learning and teaching in the second knguage ckssroom fears about their children's abiliry to succeed and raising fundamental questions about the value of school in their lives. The researcher concludes that these factors were central in contributing to the childrenb lack of continued cognitive and linguistic development in school.

Study 12: Separation ofsecond knguage learners inltrimary schoob In a longitudinal stud¡ Kelleen Toohey (2000) observed a group of children aged 5-7 inkindergarten, Grade 1, and Grade 2 inVancouver, Canada. The group included children who were native speakers of English, as well as children whose home language was Cantonese, Hindi, Polish, Punjabi, or Thgalog. A1l the children were in the same class, and English was the medium of instruction. Toohey identified three classroom practices that led to the separation of the ESL children. First, the ESL children's desks were placed close to the teacher's desk, on the assumption that they needed more direct help from the teacher. Some of them were also removed from the classroom twice a week to obtain assistance from an ESL teacher. Second, instances in which the ESL learners interacted more with each other usually involved borrowing or lending materials but this had to be done surreptitiously because the teacher did not always tolerate it. Finally, there was a'rule' in the classroom that children should not copy one another's oral or written productions. This was particularly problematic for the ESL children because repeating the words of others was often the only way in which they could participate in conversational interaction. According to Toohe¡ these classroom Practices led to the exclusion of ESL students from activities and associations in school and also in the broader communiry in which theywere new members. Furthermore, such practices did not contribute positively to the children's ESL development.

Stu¿y 13: Sociopolitical change andforeign knguage classroorn ¿iscourse In an ethnographic study of English-medium content classes in Hungarian secondary schools, Patricia Duff(1995) examined the impact of sociopolitical changes on pedagogical practice. She compared the structure and participation patterns of two classroom activities. One is a traditional activity called afelrhs which is a heavily ritualized recitation format closely associated with Soviet-oriented policies that were rejected after the fall of communism in the late 1980s. As a result, in many English-medium classes in Hungary thefeleht was replaced by a more open-ended activity called'student lecture' in which students prepared and presented material to the class in a less ritualized way. l

In an examination of the kind of language produced by students when par' ticipating in student lectures, Duffobserved a large number of spontaneoul comments and questions produced in English rather than Hungarian. Sh{ also noted how students appeared to incorporate feedback provided by thd teacher (and other students) in their subsequent production, how the teache{ and students worked together to negotiate meaning and form, and how theJ

IEI

'a)uarJedxe Surqreal u¡,ro.rnol uo.ro raldeqf, srql ur paprao.rd stdr.r¡sue.rl aqt uo uorsr)ap ;nol eseq uel no ¿t.teqf, stqt ur papnlf,ut aq plnoqs teqt saJnlea, Jeqlo aJe aJeqr ¡ulqr nol oq'(Suruear.u .ro¡ uoDerlo8eu'suollsanb aulnuaS 's.ror;a'a¡duuexa .ro¡) seJnt€al xrs epnlf ur .reldeq¡ sr¡t ur )ler luapnls

-ruaPnts pue ¡ler luapnrs-Jeq)eel aqt asl¡eue ol pesn nol leql s}¡eqf,

eqI €

uorsoep Jeqr!a,o sa8eluenpesrp /seSelue,rpe eql erE ¿u¡qr nol op leqM¿sspll eqtJo Ner aql qlt^ ueql eteJ8elur nol op Jo speeu Jreql ot puodsu o1 raq¡a3ol stuepnts asaql ¿

dno.¡8 nol oC ¿uon)nrtsur ¡o aSen8u€l aqr upqr.raqto a8en8u€l lsJU € e^€q sluapnls .rnol ¡o luer.u aleqa,r suooJsself, ¡en8ur¡rt¡nr.u ur Surqreal nol a.ry ¿ a3ue"r e asn

¿rno pug ol op nol plnor l€q¡¡¿sedlr ¡reqpaaj luaJar¡p lo nol op .ro ,retduold, € Jo .Jals€f,er, e aq ol ¡¡atno,(

nol

>¡urqr

Jeprsuof, nol plno^ 'a¡duexa.rol ¿Surqreal .lnol ut IJ€qpao, eltlf,eJJof, e)uaJeleld e a,req leu nol ¡u¡qr nol o6

¡o adó "reln¡rl.¡ed

e Sursn JoJ

¡

uollfeBoJ Jo, suollseno 'suolusod asagt 01 lue^eleJ r{JJEesaJ au¡os auruJexe pue s8untes ruooJsstlo ur pauJeel tseq aJE sa8rn8ue¡ ,/v\ol{ tnoge s,&\el^ luaJeJlp aurruexa ill¡vr arr,r tarderlo lxou erp uI

'acllr¿¡d

¡errSo8epad urvr.o ¡nol lnoge suorsrf,ep e>l¿ru nof d¡aq leru r{f,rceseJ elefs-llerus srqt ur 8ur -8t8ua ruo.r3 ure8 nol uoltetu¡oJul aql 'an8ea¡1oc EJo leql ro ruooJSSEIr u,&\o ¡nol ur suonJeJetur agr aqrJ3sep pur a Jesqo ol sloot esaqrJo auo lno l¡t ol nof a8¿¡nooua elN 'Suntas ruooJsselJ aql ur sruapnls pue sJaq)Eet uae.&\teq aoeld a>¡er rer{l suorlreJerur erp Jo stf,edse tuaJoglp aqrrf,sJp pue elJesgo ol pasn eq uer ter{t serruouoxel pue str"r{rJo sa¡duexa papr,ro.rd oslr e^Er{ e/[r 'Sururea¡ a8en8 -ue¡ u8laroj Jo puof,as or drqsuonelal slr pue lxotuoJ ¡errl¡od puB 'lrJntlnf, 'lerf,os repeorq agt Sururuexa asoql sE IIa.& sr (sadlr uorlsanb pue 1leqpeeJ

eAuJeJJof, 'a'l) sa;nrea3 prrSoSepad rgllads Sululru¿xa sarpnls Jo sarJBuI -runs PePnpur e^er{ alN'lno Perrr"f ueag sEq uons^Jesgo uIoorssBlf, r{llq^\ ur sl¿1d ruereglp Jo salduexa papr,tord pue snroJ leuoltf,nrlsul IpJa o rraqr Jo sr.uJal ul JeJIp sruooJSSEIJ ^\or{ Jo saldurexa pue suondrrcsap paruasard e^r 'pata;dratul pue pegrJosap ag uef uon)nJtsur a8en8uel puo3as Jo qllq¡ ur sfervr aqr;o euros pa \er^al a,req arn ratder{l srqr uI e^Er.l

seJnlea3 tueJeJtlp

lrerurung '8ulurca¡ a8en8ur¡ puoras flarerulrp pue arncrrd ruooJsself, spage uoneru -roJsuert ¡erulodolcos lerfl papnlruor JnC 'sSurpug asaqr Jo srseg erp uO 'ssa¡o¡d eql ur sllpls uorsuJgardruoc pue 'fcerncre 'fcuang rlaqr pado¡a,rap ruoo.¿ss?fr a&an&ual puoras

aqt ut Sutqtaal puo Sututaal Suxarasqo

152

Obseruing learning and teaching in the second knguage classroom

Suggestions for further reading Spada, N. and M. Fróhlich. 1995. 7he Communicatiue Orientation of Language Teaching Obseruation Scheme: Coding Conuentions and App li catio ns. Sydney: Macmillan.

This book describes the origins and purposes of the Communicative Orientation of Language Teaching (COLT) observation scheme. COII describes the pedagogical practices and verbal interactions that take place between teachers and students with the aim of describing the instruction as being more or less communicatively oriented. It also provides detailed guidelines and illustrations for using COLI including how to collect data, how to code the data, and how to analyse it. Also included are descriptions of how COLT has been used in second/foreign language classrooms throughout the world.

Toohe¡ K. 2000. Learning English at School: Identi4t, Social Relations and Classroom Practice. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. This book addresses a common educational practice in many countries in the world in which children from minority language backgrounds are taught in mainstream English-medium classes. Through a longitudinal description of a group of children learning English from kindergarren ro the end of Grade 2 ín a Canadian school, the reader is introduced to a range ofsocial and critical perspectives on education and how they can be applied to child second language learning. The book provides important insights and useful guidance about how teachers and schools can support

minority language children in their efforts to become educated through the medium of English. W'ajnryb, R. 1992. Classroom ObseruationThshs: A Resource Boohfor Language Teachers and Tlainers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. This book is mainly addressed to teachers to illustrate how they can use observation to learn about their own teaching. Readers are guided through a variety of different tasks and shown how to observe, analyse, and refect on various aspects ofinstruction including learners, language, lessons, and teaching strategies.

uauo sarPnls aseql 'slf,aJa asaql SuunsBauJo slE,/v\ pug pu¿ sluauuoJr^ue tuaJaglp ur llrelrruls Surureal nagr leru reqr salgerre ryrcads ,flruepr or l¡ensn sr sarpnls ¡eluarurradxa3o po8 aq1 'Sulurea¡ aeuangur feru ler{r selq¿ -IJE al{rJo IoJluof, InJeJm 8un¡o,rur 'ptuarurradxe eq osp leur tr 'Jelel'roH 'a,rndrrcsep l¡¡enuassa ag leu q3JeeseJ a,rnelltuenb 'g .rardeq3 ur a^\ ^\es ryserpnrs a.trteu¡enb grdap-ul ol alrrelrlu¿nb a¡rcs-a8rel ruo5 'saqceo;dde ¿ esn ol paau arrL'acltl¿¡d uooJsself ro3 s¡esodord ssesse oJ qiftaseJJo a8u¿¡

'8ulurea1 pue 8ur -r{reat uee^uag sdlqsuonelar salegnse^ul l¡eogrcads ltql rlf,Jeesar q8norqr sr (¿sruooJSSEIl ur Sururea¡ a8en8ue¡ eloruo¡d or lernt rsag aqr sr rer{lN, uonsanb aqt Je rsue or fe,Lr.l¡uo aql rng 'sar.roeqt asar{t tueueldrul or padola,rap uaaq aAEr{ slcrJeteu pue spoqrau Sunpear eJoru ualg 'ruooJssel3 eqr ur egen8 -u?l puof,as e uJ¿al or &,tl rsaq aqr ro3 pasodo.rd ueaq eler{ serJoar{l luryq

Eulgceal roJ spsodord pua eqt ur rqSrr tr

la3

9

elgEr{rEel sr leq,/( qrEel 5 euo JoJ o1!\1 taD 7 Eral €

>lpr

e",u",a,{l{"J:;;rr'i:l l:J

Í

:arr s¡esodord asaqr ua.tl8 a^Eq er'l' slaq¿l aql 'ssauelnraga .rraqt ssess¿ ot d¡ag reqr s8ur -pug r{fJeesal ssnfsrp pur'a3r}f,EJd ruoorsse¡e otur peltlsue¡l ta8 s¡esodord ar{r eteJtsnill ol uonf,EJatur uooJssel3 ruor3 saldruexa apu.ord '8un1cear ^\oq a8en8ue¡ u8laro3 pue puof,es ro3 s¡rsodord xrs aurturxa a¡r tatdrqr srqr uI

A er^eJd

WOOUSSVff, EHI NI DNINUVE-I EDVNCNVT CNOfflS

t54

Second language learning in the ckssroom

involve large numbers of learners in an effort to avoid the possibility that the unusual behaviour of one or two individuals might lead to a misleading conclusion about learners in general. Qualitative research, including ethnographies and case studies, often involves small numbers, perhaps one class or only one or two learners in that class. The emphasis is not on what is most general but rather on a thorough understanding ofwhat is particular about what is happening in this classroom. As pointed out byAnn Burns (2010) and others, while quantitative and qualitative research are important in assessing theoretical proposals, action research carried out by teachers in their own classrooms is also essential to answer specific local questions. In this chapter we focus mainly on experimental studies. These are studies that were designed to test hypotheses about how teaching affects second language learning. Readers are encouraged to follow up with further reading but also to explore related questions through research activities within their own teaching and learning environments.

I

Get it rightfrom the beginning 'Get it right from the beginning' is probably the proposal that

character-

izes more second and foreign language instruction than any other kind. Although communicative language teaching has come to dominate in some environments, the structure-based approaches discussed in Chapter J, especially grammar translation, remain widespread.

The grammar translation approach has its origin in the teaching of classical languages (for example, Greek and Latin). Students were presented with vocabulary lists, often accompanied by translation equivalents, and grammar rules. The original purpose of this approach was to help students read literature rather than to develop fuency in the spoken language. It was also thought that this approach provided students with good mental exercise to help develop their intellectual and academic abilities. a rypical grammar translation activiry students read a text together line by line and are asked to translate it from the target language into their native

In

language. Students may answer comprehension questions based on the passage, often in their first language. The teacher draws attention to a specific grammar rule that is illustrated by the text (for example, a certain verb form). Following this, the students are given an exercise in which they are asked to practise the grammar rule, for example, by filling in the blanks with the appropriate verb form in a series of decontextualized sentences that may or may not be related to the text they have read and translated.

Audiolingual instruction arose in part as a reaction to the grammar transla''1 tion approach. The argument was that, unlike grammar translation teachingl in which students learned about the language, audiolingual teaching would

t9t

's8uqr Jarpo orJo repu¿,r\ spuru Jrer{r allr{^{ 'Aenttue ruagr teadar l¡n¡ssarrns ill^\ uBalu safua}ues aql (PaaPuI 'Sulles are larp rEr{1l\ rnoqB EaPI ou a^EL{ oqa sruePnls auJos ra8 ot uoseeJ ou e^Er{ sruePnls eql 'uollllada; a'rn¿ rEr{,/v\

>lun{r or Jo pa

lolul

(uern¡reg'g pue unoqrqS¡1'W A tuoryel¿P Patlsllqndu¡) 'ruol4tr 'rrra; lra,r aJB

'tuory

'rvral .(ta,r eJB

aJeql ssvr:) eJal{l r

¿;otera8tr3ar eql uI saoletuol lue aJaqt arv ssv'Ic r ¿roteraSt.tSar aqt uI saoteruot fue aJel{r eJV 'ruory 'aptr¡ fra,t s,eJeql ssvr) 'IuoIAtr 'a¡rr¡¡ Lra,r

s

arar{I

J

¿rotera8u3ar aqt uI Jeunq fur araqr s1 ssvr:) 'aru rage leada¡ r ¿rotera8trje; aqr uI rertng fue araqr q ('a8en8ue¡ uSraro3 e se qsr¡8ug30 sreureel pp-rca'L7¡3o dnor8

y)

7z|duruxg ¡g.ra,r ruasard a¡duils eqlJo asn lfaJJof, eqt set\ pareDeru rErLA 'lue^rlerrl stm (3op e a eq lou PIP ro PIP aq rEI{r rf,EJ aql 'asrc sIrP uI {¡rca¡3

eqt ua^e ro) 8op slq qruv\ acuar¡adxa

IEeJ s.ruePnrs

(uerulreg 'g PuE uz'roqrq8rl

'1z.{

A

ruo{

E}EP

Peqsllqndu¡)

(¡op am les uer a^\ rnq 'oN =) ¡arlP a¡ rnad uo sIE{u 'uoN I s (¡8op r e^eq rusaop a¡1 =) ¡uanp ap sed e,u ¡1 zs ¿8op

'qn I 'qn

(qn

PUB

rnol

qsrrr,r

[uaq] 'o¡ Is nof ,'(rp lra,rg r '8op

l¡r¡

rs

'r{se \ I J '8op fur Surgse.t euoq aulof I 'I{n 'uoouJeuB ar{r uI '.qn PUV I s

('sqra,r gsl18ug3o tuasa¡d a¡durs aql uo peseg aslrraxe ue ut Pa^lo^ul sluaPnls p¡o-real-g 1io dnor8 y)

t a\duaxg

laqr a-ro3aq sllgeq PEq asaql .'sutuut8aq eqr ruo5 rq8u rr toD, PuB uaddeg (PIes sI ll 's¡oJJe aql 'sJoJJa lua,ra¡d or Jaueq sr lr os 'sllqeq oluofeq PInoJ a>lEru ot uaqr plno,&\ sryr lEr{l suJesuo:3o rno l¡aar3 leads sraurea¡ Sutu ^\ollE -ul8aq Sulrra¡ pro E sraqf,ta¡ d¡snoaueruods a8¿nBuEI eql asn flartl sluaPnts ,a8en8ue¡ pJo aqr uo sl slsrqdrua aqr g8noqr uala'ter{t luePIAa sr r1 'Surgcrar pageJ ,/r\oleq sa¡duexa ag1 'ssf¡eue elllseJluof, Pue usIJnoI ¡en8urolpne sernr pn8urtorpnE aI{} lBql 1ú3s arrr '7 lardeq3 u1 qreoldde a8en8ue¡ agr >pads f¡enrce ol sluaPnrs PEal -^Brieq uo PesEg

'Fzgg opel :9961 sloorg)

ruoo$cryJ aql utSurutaal aSan&ual puotag

r56

Second knguage learning

in the ckssroom

ftE?W:TIT€ Soox tS ox'TH6 -D¿5|<

\ -¡1¡g

tpfi

19

cN{ THE DESK

Research findings

Many adult learners, especially those with good metalinguistic knowledge oftheir own language, express a preference for structure-based approaches. Learners whose previous language learning experience was in grammar translation classes may also prefer such instruction. As we saw in Chapter 3, learners' beliefs about the kind of instruction that is best can influence their satisfaction and success. The grammar translation approach is useful for the study of grammar and vocabulary and can be valuable for understanding important cultural texts. The audiolingual approach with its emphasis on speaking and listening was used successfully with highly motivated adult liarners-in intensive training programmes for government personnel in the United States. However, there is little classroom research to support such approaches for students in ordinary school programmes that must serve the needr of students who bring different levels of motivation and aptitude to the classroom. In fact, it was the frequent failure of traditional grammar translation and audiolingual methods to produce fluency and accuracy in second language learners that led to the development of more communicative approaches to teaching in the first place. Supporters of communicative language teaching have argued th-at language is nát learned by the gradual accumulation of one grammatical feature aftel anorher. They suggesi that errors are a natural and valuable part ofthe language learning process. Furthermore, they believe that the motivation ol i."rn.tr is often stifled by an insistence on correctness in the earliest staget

L9I

perelosr-paf,uauadxJ PEr{ sruePnls uoltrnrlsul Jo adlr 3qr rBqr PalsaSSns s8ulpuy aseql 'uaqr paonpord sJaureal ruooJssrlr aseql I{rrI{^\ gllm frernore e¡rr sacuanbas pruatudola^aP aqr uee \leg seJue a^nslsJ er{r PuE aJaql ^\"s -reglp pa.{\oqs srpsar ¿gL'gy'd'7 ntdeq3 aas) srauftal a8en8utl Puoras pelfnJlsurun 3o aSrn8uelJelul eqt uI pelJesqo sauregd;oru ¡ecrreurtue.r8 3o uorlrslnb¡e aqr qrv'r parrduor ser'r (8ezz- a,Ltsse¡8o.rd eqr PuB t- IeJnld 'a¡druexa ro3) sauaqdJou Ief,neuJruer8 qsr18ufl ul"tJef 3o uotttstnbfe (sJauJeal aql 'ZpuE 1 sa¡duexE ur.ry\ES a^\ IIIJp acnc¿¡d u¡anBd pue uonpader etorJo sadlr aqr ul parrdlr¡rrrd l¡errdlr saruue¡8o¡d eseqt ur sruopnrs 'epEuEJ 'cagan| ul 9I-I1 pa8e sraureel Suupads-qruatg uo pesnfoJ suone8rlsa,rul egl 'tuarudo¡ar'ap a8en8ue¡rotul uo uollsnJtsul pn8ur¡orpne Jo pega ar{r otul suoneSllsarrul ltuollras-ssoJo PuE ¡eulpnrr8 -uol3o sarres E lno parrref, (q9ege} u.,rtoqrr¡811 lsre¿'sg¿61 elel eqr qI lr¿P u¿a$?d \an8uq otpnv :, I t?ws

.191tpnr5) uorlrn.rlsul pasuq-8u¡rreeru pue -tuJoJ Jo suolleurgruoo ruaraglP 8ur¡laoa¡ sruapnlsJo sdno¡8 uaa,t\teq óuarcgo;d a8enSurl Puof,esJo ruarudo¡a,rap eql ut sraurea¡ e8enS

1o suosrrcduof, pue '(71 lpnrg) saruue¡8o¡d pn8ul¡olpne -uEI puolas Jo tuarudo¡a,tap a8en8ue¡rarul ar{l Jo salPnls a,utdtrosap aPnPuI

esaql 'qr¿ordd¿ ,suluur8aq aqt ruot3 rq8rr lI la), eqr ol Paruauo llSuorrs sl teql uoltfnJtsurJo srage eqt ssass¿ ot sn llru¡ad oP l{fJeeseJ uroorsst¡c a8en8 -uEI puooes uorS s8ulpug aruos'sseleqleuoN'Poseq-eJnlf,nns l¡a,usnlf,xa eJ¿

teql suroorsselr pug or tlnJSIp sI lI 'Plro¡a Jr{l Jo sued raqro ul Suryceat

eql

a8un8ue¡ e^nrf,IunuruJoc 3o uotldope pea.rdsapl.&\ eqr qrl^\ 'Pueq JeIPo u6 'Suruearu uo slseqdrua ue sare¡d Sulqf,eer aqt aJar{^/r\ sluooJsselJ (r'ra3 l-ra,r .ro) ou err erer{l s8ullras asaql ul pue 'Sutqreat a8en8ue¡ or saqoeordde Paseq -aJnlonrrs l¡rueunuopard spug auo aJal{./v\ PIJolv\ aqr3o srrrd lueru are araqt esnef,aq sl sr

s¡ll

tr 'Jela,rroH

'sdno¡3 uost¡rduoc ¡ado¡d PuU ot sJeI{fJEesaJ ro3 lsea tou laqt uoncnrlsurJo adlr aqr ro3 ldaoxa srcadsar ¡¡e ur

'eAreJaJ

JEIIruls aJE ltql sdno¡8 a¡eduoc ot ,(¡rssarau aq PFo,/t\ 1I 'srsaqlodlg lelp lset o¡'sa8ers f¡rea aqr ut Suluearu uo st stseqdrua eqr ueq.^a PaAaII{f,e esoqr ueqr stlnseJ raueq or peel'unr 3uo¡ aqr ul '¡l,v'Sulureal a8en8ue¡ puoras3o sa8ers l1.rra aqr ur uroJ uo slsegdrua u¿ ragraq^\ rser ol rln3glp sl u 'f¡areunrroJufl

',8uruul8ag aqr ruo5 rq8u rr la9, sraureel rEI{t erns 8ur1tu JoJ IIEf, eqr r"el{ Jo uoIlEzIIISsoj l¡ree ot PEel III^I uollsnJlsur lr¡rTdxa

a¡l ure8e a3uo

'sJoJJa

put uonf,aJJof tnoqtl,r\ ,tuopae{, qfnur oot sJauJrel Surrtro¡e reqr an8re lagl 'Surueaur uo snf,oJ a^Isnloxe uE salBJoAPe reqr Surgoear a8en8ue¡ a,rtr -sf,runruruoJ Jo uoIsJeA aIP or PalsEaJ AA¿r{ SJolEfnPe PUE sJJr{3J¿as3J auos ',r()e JnJ)e, eJ o3aq,lcuang, ol sJeuJeel a8e¡nooua ol Jeuag sI tI t¿ql an8.rr ¡esodold ,Suruut8aq ruo5 rr¡8u rr ra9, al{rJo srueuoddo asaql 'Surulea¡ a8en8uel PuolasJo

do¡a,rap ar{1

utootssplr aql ut &uruna1 a8an&ury puotag

158

Second knguage learning in the classroom

pattern practice drills-resulted in a developmental sequence that appeared to be different from that of learners in more natural learning environments. For a time after their instruction had focused on it, learners reliably produced a particular grammatical morph.eme in its obligatory contexts. For example, after weeks of drilling on present progressive, students usually supplied both the auxiliary be and the -ing ending (for example, 'He's playing ball'). However, they also produced one or more of the morphemes in places where they did not belong ('He's want a cookie'). The same forms were produced with considerably less accuracy in obligatory contexts when theywere no longer being practised in class and when the third person singular simple present -s was being drilled instead. At this point, many students appeared to revert to what looked like a developmentally earlier stage, using no tense marking at all (for example, 'He play ball'). These findings provided evidence that an almost exclusiye focus on accuracy and practice of particular grammatical fbrms does not mean that learners will be able to use the forms correcdy outside the classroom drill setting, nor that they will conrinue ro use them correctly once other forms are introduced. Not surprisingly, this instruction, that depended on repetition and drill of decontextualized sentences, did not seem to favour the development of comprehension, fluency, or communicative abilities either.

Study I 5 : Grammar p las communicatiue practice In one of the earliest experimental studies ofcommunicative language teaching, Sandra Savignon (I972) studied the linguistic and communicative skills of 48 college students enrolled in French language courses at an American university. The students were divided into three groups: a'communicative' group, a'culture' group, and a control group. All groups received about four hours per week of audiolingual instruction where the focus was on the practice and manipulation of grammatical forms. In addition, each group had a special hour of different activities. The 'communicative' group had one hour per week devoted to communicative tasks in an effort to encourage practice in using French in meaningful, creative, and spontaneous ways. The 'culture' group had an hour devoted to activities, conducted in English, designed to 'foster an awareness of the French language and culture through films, music, and art'. The control group had an hour in the language laboratory doing grammar and pronunciation drills similar to those they did in their regular class periods.

to measure learners' linguistic and communicative abilities were administered before and after instruction. The tests oflinguistic competence included a variery of grammar tests, teachers' evaluations of speaking skills, and course grades. The tests of communicative competence included measures of fuency and of the abiliry to understand and transmit information in a variety of tasks, which included: discussion with a native speaker of French,

Tests

69r

a8en8uq puof,es tegr srsaSSns tl asnmag ¡esodo.rd prsJe orluof, E sr srql '(6Se t 'l86I) urqser) uagdarg sr ¡rsodord sryt qtra pererrosse f¡aso¡c rsoru erueu esoqa lEnpr^rpur agr '7 rardeqC ur parou sy'Surpear Jo/pue Sulual aJE sreureal uaqrrr are¡d se>1er sr

-sr¡ gSno.rgr tndul a¡qrsuaqarduor ot pasodxa uo¡lsmbce a8rn8uq

rrqr srsaqtodlq aqr uo paseq sr (pEeJ pu¿ "' uatsr¡ tsn[, Pu? " ' ualw rn[ e

??a¿

'¡esodord ,pue aql ur rq8rr lr lJC, eql or uonEIeJ ur lrelep aJour ur passnf,srp aq IIIr\ uononJlsur pesnf,oJ-Jerurue.r8 pue acrtce¡d alnef,runururoJ Jo suonnglJtuof, ar{I'lou sr

uonf,nJtsur paseq-uJoJ leqr lou 'snoa8elue,tpe

sr

uononJtsur paseq-8uru¿eur

teqr ruarun8Je er{r JoJ r¡oddns srago lpnrs slgt 'sp;orrr Jer{ro uI 'rueuoduor aonce¡d elnef,runuruJol leuorrrppr ueJo af,uasg¿.ro aruese¡d aqlJo suJel ur l¡uo paragp lagl 'uonrnrtsur pasnloJ-¡euu¡e.18 te¡n8a; rlaqt elraf,oJ or pen -unuo3 stuaprus ¡r 'fpnrs uou8l,reg aql ur reqr azrsrqdrua ot turuodul sl t1 'Suluearu Surssa¡dxa pue SulpuersJepun uo sl srsegdrue erp eJeI{ \ slxeruof uI arllce¡d a¡,nrfrunruruof JoJ sarlrunlJoddo uo-r3 rgauaq sJauJeal r"qr ef,uapna apl,rord sJrpnls asaqr ruoU sllnseJ eql 'uollBf,Iunulluor ro3 o8pa¡mou>l Jlaql Sursn ur sef,ueqf, a>let or luelrnloJ pu? perlqlqul IeeJ ol sraurral speal uarJo l¡r¡n¡cr uo ssegdrua tuooJsself, aq1 'a8en8uel ra8.rtr eq] rnoge,t\ou>I sruap -nls teqzvr auruJJarap ol lFr5t¡p lra,r uatSo sI rI 'rf,BJ u1 'a8pa¡.tou¡ cnsln8ur pue lrerncrp Jo sla al q8rq do¡a,rap sJeureal reqr eeluertn8 tou op Sulgcear or sagcrorddt pe$q-ernrrnns l¡arrtsnlf,xa ro f¡reulrd reqr u,l.lor{s osp seq arual;adxg 'a8rn8ur¡ puof,as e ul l¡a,rrrcaga suolluelul pur sa8essaru ;tagt atef,rununuof, 01 elqeun uauo aJ? uoltfnJlsul uoltelsueJt-Jetutue¡3 ro ¡rn8 -urlorpnE 8ur¡lara¡ sJauJBaT 'suoIrEtIruII luel¡odut seg ¡esodord ,SutuulSag aql ruo5 rgSu rr reD, aqr uo paseg uolr3nJtsul leql sJauJrel pur sJeqJeat Jo suonrnlul egr uoddns ol afuapl^e ap¡.nord e^oqe pa.&al^al sarpnrs eql

qrreeser agl Sunerdrerul 'lc¿¡n:oe onsmSu{3o seJn$eur uo IIa^\ ssal op or sJouJ¿el esnef, rou plp uorreJrunruurof, Jaa{ JoJ sauun}¡oddo rEI{l efuept,ra al{l se/'r qcro.rdde ,SuruulSag aqr tuo5 rg8rr rr rag, el{rJo lxaluor al{t ur luet¡odrul aJoru ueAE 'a8en8ue¡ puof,as e ur setttllqe uoll¿f,Iunuuor do¡a,rap ot Álunl -¡oddo luarlgns sluepnls a¡'t8 tou op tuJoJ pue lrerncce uo l¡uo sn3oJ teql serurue¡8o¡d a8en8ue¡ puof,as regr ruaun8Jr aql JoJ uoddns sE stlnseJ eseql paterdratur uou8lreg 'lpnrs aqr roj padola,tap slsar elltBoluntuuroo JnoJ aqr uo sdno¡8 o,/$l raqro aqr uEI{t raq8lq l¡rueoglu8¡s Paross dno¡8 e^IleJlunur -ruof, er{l fe,l,ervrog 'saJnseeul acualadu¡or rnstnSull eql uo sdno¡8 ueer't.taq (uoltf,nrlsulJo porrad er{r3o saJuaraglp rueog¡u8¡s ou eJe r aJal{l Pua aW tV s

'r.{f,ueJ{ ur sanIAI}fE Suro8uo Sulgl-rcsap pue 'sallllllf,? tuef,eJ auo JoJlesauo lnogr srcr3 Suruodal 'q3uaJCJo.ra>1eads a,rrteu t Surrvtal^Jelul

utoo.tstap acp ut &utu"taa1 a8anSual puotag

r60

Second knguage learning in tbe classroom

learners do not need to produce language in order to learn it, excepr perhaps to get other people to provide input by speaking to them. According to this view, it is enough to hear (or read) and understand the target language. Read Example 3 to get a feel for how this theory of classroom second language

learning can be implemented in a classroom. This description shows that one way to obtain comprehensible input is to provide learners with listening and reading comprehension activities with no (or very few) opportunities to speak or interact with the teacher or other learners in the classroom.

Example 3 It is time for English class at a primary school in a French-speaking community in New Brunswick, Canada. The classroom looks like a miniature language lab, with about thirry small desks, on each of which there is a cassette player and a set of large earphones. Around rhe room, shelves and racks display scores of books. Each book is packaged with an audiocassette that contains a recording of its content. The materials are not strictly graded, but some sets of books are very simple, and other sets are grouped so that they are gradually more challenging. There are pre-school childrent books with a picture and a word or two on each page; illustrated stories with a few sentences per page; picture dictionaries; ESL textbooks for children; illustrated science books about animals, weather, vehicles, etc. Students (aged B-10) enter the classroom, select the material they want, and take it to their individual workspace. They insert the cassette, put on their earphones, and open their books. They hear and read English for the next 30 minutes. For some of the time the teacherwalks around the classroom, checking that the machines are running smoothly, but she does not interact with the students concerning what they are doing. Some of the students are listening with closed eyes; others read actively, mouthing the words silently as they follow each line with a finger. The classroom is almost silent except for the sound of tapes being inserted and removed or chairs scraping new tapes and books.

as

students go to the shelves to select

Research findings

... and read' proposal includes studies of comprehension-based teaching and extensive reading (Day et al.2011). \7e will also look at some comprehension-based instruction in which the input is manipulated in ways that are intended to increase the likelihood that students will pay attention to language form as well as meaning. Research relevant to the 'Just listen

Sndy 1 6: Comprehension- based insnuction for cbildren

Example 3 was a description of a real programme implemented in experimental classes in a French-speaking region in Canada. From the beginning of their ESL instruction at age eight, students only listened and read during their daily 3O-minute ESL period. There was no oral practice or interaction

r9t

leqr punoJ ar{S 'peal l¡enrre tuapnls r{f,Ea qooq er{rJo suJat ur passass" aq p¡noc Sulureel teqr os seJnseaur l.repgeco,r pazrpnpr^rpul pado¡a,rap rsroH 'u1v\o rlel{l uo uaql PEaJ Pu¿ euoq qoog >loor sluapnls 'pol;ad >lea1v\-xrs e JeAO drerqr¡ ssEIf, E ur elqelre^E eperu aJe.& leql srepeer pe5lldurs asor{r sluapnts(sself,'ISA reln8ar rreqlJo sanrlnf,¿ aqr ol uorlrppe u1 's¡ale¡ louangord pue spuno.rSlceq a8enSu¿l lera^as paluasarda;

stuedlrlued lZ¿qL 'EpBu€J 'leaJtuory ur aJtue3 Álunruruo¡ E ur erurueJ8 -ord 1gg u¿ ur pelloJue aJa^\ oqrrl sruerSrulrur llnpe Suou¡e ruarudo¡a,rap l.rrlnqero,rjo lpnrs e ur srapear pegrldurrs pasn (ggg¿) rsroH esrlrery 'eldrurs ureural a/rs Surrrrr* pue lre¡nqef,o arlt allq/v\ 'lueluor arel.ldo¡dde-e?e pue Sunsaratur JaJo sJallrJr{r pue 'sef,ucruo; 'sargdrrSorq 'sfrsstlr l¡e¡all

pagldurs eseql 'elqelle,re l¡Sulsearf,ur ere sreureel'ISE llnpe .ro3 pau8lsap llprcads sJep¿al paperS tng (ool Sur8ua¡egc sr uonrsrnbf,r a8en8ue¡ puooas 3o sa8ers l¡rea ur stpp€ roJ Ierrereru Surpear Sulpurg '8uÉua¡erp sr aSen8 -uBI puof,es r Sururea¡ stuapnrs loor{Js l¡erul¡d JoJ I?rJelEu Surpear Surpulg swoot "tot8uryoa¿

:/ I [pus

'uorlfEJalur

ruooJssEls Pu? 'ú>lf,EgPeej Jagf¿al 'slueu -odruoc Sulu¡¡'r pue Suqeads rarpo osle rng uonrnJtsul ¡en8ulorpne lluo tou papnlJur arurue.rSo¡d .re1n8a.r eql eJer{,ll sesse¡f, ur aJe l, sluepnts asoql '8ultr¡zvt ul l¡elcadsa 'sse¡8o.rd ¡alea¡8 eperu p?q aruur¡8o¡d re¡n8a; eqr uI sruapntsJo sdno¡8 aruos 'seJns¿eru Jeqlo uO 'au¡ru¿¡8o¡d;e¡n8ar aql ur sruap

-nts sE IIa^\ sE ruroSrad ol panunuoc lagr 'uoltcnpord I"JoJo saJnspau¡ euros uo pue seJnseeru uolsuaqardruof, uO 'arun ler{r rnog8norgr auruerSord l¡uo -uolsuaqa;duof, eql ur panunuof, peq stuepnts aruos 'B epEJD ut arazrr laqr ueq.&'JelEI s;eaf aarqr passesseal eJa \ sant¡tge a8rn8uel qsl¡8uE (sluJpnls eql '6OOZ 'lE le l{rr^oruAo¡-:2007 '¡e ra ur*oqrq8r1) sasse¡r rraql ul r¡sÉug ua>1ods pasrrce;d Jaleu perl aruue¡8o¡d ¡etuarul;adxa aql ur sreur?el ap g8noqr uela 'Suupads ro3 os¡e tng uorsuaqa¡druoc.roS l¡uo rou anJl s¿,44 srql 'auJuJerSord re¡n8al erp ur sJauJeel (ueqr arour sespJ euJos ur pue) se qsl¡8ug r{f,nru sE ^/r\au1 euuBrSo.rd paseq-uolsuarla.lduof, eq} uI sJeuJeel 's¡eef orrrt ra¡ry lep ¡ad satnulru 0E persel r¿rp sesse1f, prq serurueJSo;d qroq ur sluapnls eql 1¡V 'qceordde ¡en8uuolpne ue f¡uleu se,tr l{f,Irl.,lr 'atutu¿.18 -o.rd 1gg re¡n8ar aqt ur stuepms Jo rer{r qrpr Suturral rrrqr paredruoo pue arurue¡8o¡d paseq-uorsuaqerdruoc sr{l ur uJrplrrlo Jo spoJpunq 3o ruarudo -le^ep a8rn8ue¡ puof,as aqr pare8rrsa,rul sanSral¡of, raq pue urttoqrq8rl lsre¿ 'JeAo3 >lf,eg s,>looq E aplsul padel 'sp.ror'r ,/rcJ E Jo slua¡e,unba uoIlEISuEJt ot JeJeJ PInoJ larp l¡euorserro 'qsl¡8ug pu? r{ruaJC uI rellruls ere IEI{I spro \ ateuSoc 8ul -zlu8ooar fg ¡o sa.rntcrd aqr Sulsn dq Sulurau¡ re passan8 faql 'sraureel ral{to Jo raqf,eel eqr qrlry\ qsrlSug ul uollJeratul ou l¡¡enrrr,r perl faqr rnq qooq pue sedet ruorS rndur raleads-allteu pe^Iaf,eJ sJeuJ?el 'sng1 'rroddns pfluqf,al tou plp sral{f,eeJ'¡p re qslSug ul

pu¿ leuonezlueS¡o papl.to.rd

lnq

,r{reat,

utootssqJ aqt ut 8urutua1 a8unSual yuotag

r62

Second language learning in the ckssroom

there was vocabulary growth attributable to reading, even over this short period, and that the more students read, the more words they learned. She concluded that substantial vocabulary growth through reading is possible, but that students must read a great deal (more than just one or two books per semester) to realize those benefits. As we saw in Chapter 2, when we interact in ordinary conversations, we tend to use mainly the 1,000 or 2,000 most frequent words. Thus, reading is a particularly valuable source of new vocabulary. Students who have reached an intermediate level of proficiency may have few opportunities to learn new words in everyday conversation. It is in reading a variety of texts that students are most likely to encounter new vocabulary. The benefit of simplified readers is that students encounter a reasonable number of newwords. This increases the likelihood that they can figure out the meaning of new words (or perhaps be motivated to look them up). If the new words occur often enough, students may remember them when they encounter them in a new context.

Other research that explores the 'Just listen ... and read' proposal includes studies in which efforts have been made to draw second language learners' attention to language forms in the input, for example, by providing highfrequenry exposure to specific language features through an input food, highlighting the features through enhanced input, and/or providing processing instruction. All of these are described in more detail below but the emphasis in all cases is on getting learners to notice language forms in the input, not on getting them to practise producing the forms. The next three studies are examples of this research.

Stady

18:

Inputflood

Martha Tiahey and Lydia \,X/hite (1993) carried out a study with young French-speaking learners (aged 10-12) in intensive ESL classes in Quebec such as those described in Chapter 5, Study 10. The goal of the research was to determine whether high-frequency exposure to a particular form in the instructional input would lead to better knowledge and use of that form by the students. The linguistic form investigated was adverb placement in English (see Chapter 2, p. 58). For approximately 10 hours over a two-week period, learners read a series ofshort texts in which theywere exposed to literally hundreds of instances of adverbs in English sentences-so many that the investigators referred to this study as an 'input food'. There was no teaching of adverb placement, nor was any error correction provided. Instead, students simply read the passages and completed a variety of comprehension actiYities based on them. Although learners benefited from this exposure to sentences with adverbs in all the correct positions, their learning was incomplete. They improved in their acceptance of sentences with word order that is grammatical in English but not in French ('The children quickly leave school'). However,

t9r

'GOOZ arrr.¡,1\ pue 'unoqrq8rl 'eped5) sJauruJalep a¡tlssassod l3eJJof, ar{t pug or raqraSor paTo^\ ueqr puE a¡nr a¡duls e ua¡r8 araz'r lar¡r uag,u ssarSo¡d a¡oru aperu sJauftel rer{l punoJ elrq¿\'r{fJeasal ruanbasqns u¡ :ossassod ar{rJo.lapua8 Jr{r qf,turu ol Jaurur -Jelep alrssassod agl asooql ot 1(oq uJeal lou plp sluepnts ''rta 'sJeltal ¡eudeo 'adó p¡oq3o asn aqt fq parqS¡q8l{ ara,,n sturoJ er{r q8norp ua^a'sr IBIII'sra -uruJeleP a¡trssassod ot uorluJllP (sJeuJ¿el er{f ol UrlTdxa lFualcgns ^,\BJP selr\ lue(uaJurr{ua eqr Jer{ler{ { suortsanb errqrh\ 'sSurpug asaqt Sunardratur uI 'uraqr uae \req ef,uereJlP eFtrl sBld erar{r reqr PUE sruJoj asJqrJo esn PUE aSpa¡mou1 rrer{t ur pa,rordul sdno;8 qtoq teqr punoJ er{S 'luetuorutqua lnoqlra slxat Jluss er{l P?JJ orl^\ sJauJ¿elJo lBr{1 gtv'r saSessed pacuegua f¡ec -qderSodÁ ar{t pEaJ per{ oq,/!\ sreureelJo a:ueuro;rad aqr pa.redruof, etrqr6

'sxet ar{t pear laqr

sE

sJaurruJatep

a,ussassod aql a:nou ol sreureal aql peal pFo,&\ srql teqr ser'r srsegrodfil aq1 'sJeDal ¡rudec ur uaurJ^/\ Jo 'pazrfrlell 'paul1;apun 'adlr p¡oq ur s¿,l.r lr 'slxel aql ur peftedd¿ ¡aulu¡atap a rssassod ¿ eult l¡a,ra 'sl terll 'peppr selv\ luaru -eruequa ¡ecrqde.rSodlr ter{} sr poog rndur Eerrqr6 put laqera pue lpnls srql E JaAo poplrto.rd sJnr^nfe uae^\lag e uaJeJIp ¡oleu aq1 'porrad >leJ

^.-o^\r

uolsuaqardruof, pue slerJet¿ru Sulpear3o a8elced e g8norqr sJeuruJJerap alrs -sassod3o sparpunq or arnsodxe3o sJnol{ g1 l¡arrurxordde pa,rra:ar sluapnrs 'sessrlr TSg a^rsuetul ul ZI-I1 pa8e sreur¿el Suurads-r¡ruarg fq G5 'd'f, rardeq3 eas :.Jar{, pue ,slq, f¡ngrcads) sJauruJelep a,ussassod3o uolrlslnbf,E

eql peuruexa (866I) etrqr6 euueof 'tndut Parueque Sutrt¡o,rut fpnrs e u1 'paurEal aq p¡no,,rr laqr rBqr saf,uer{f, aqt Sutsearcur snql 'a8en8ue¡ Puof,as aqr ur saJnleeJ ol uonuelte (sJauJ?el me.rp rg8rru reqr sSulqr 3o lral¡e,r B ol JaJaJ ot ,tueurorurqua lndur, rurar aql peulor (eGGl) qrltus poo,llrel{S IeeI{3rI{

tndut pacuaqul :6 I tp"tS

',pue eqr ur rq8u 1l tag, uollres eqt uI ¡erep oJour uI passnf -srp sr srql 'tuarudo¡e,rep prnunuoo (sJauJeal ro3 lressarau aq leru a8en8ue¡ puof,as aqt ur Imrrtuu¡e¡8 lou sr lerllv\ rnoge uolleurJoJut llolldxa aJo(u 'snql '(oSrn8ue¡ rsJg Jraqt pue) a8en8uelralur rrJrp ur luasa¡d eJE tEI{r sluorueloJo a8en8ur¡ ra8rer aqr ur ef,uesqt er{l arltou or sJauJeel r¡urrad ot g8noue tou sr ef,uepr^e e plsod '(¡ecrtrrurue¡8 rou sr lerllv\ lnog? uolteruro3ul) af,ueplle e,rnrSau ueqr ar'13 01 slrej '(a8en8uel Puoes aqt uI ¡ectteruurerS sl req^{ tnoqr uorlrrrJroSur) aruapr,ra a,rnlsod qrlu'r sJeuJea¡ sap¡,rord rndul aSen8uel or e¡nsodxa g8nogr¡e regr pan8re (I66I) errqA\ eplq'T..rerdrq3 uI perou rya8rn8uq tsrg rrarp uo peseg rorra uBJo pu ra8 ol rueqr pral lou p¡p lnq Sulqrauos ppe tuaql d¡aq p¡nor poog tndur aqr 'a8en8ue¡rarur Jrarp ol ^,\.eu reqr srsaS8ns r¡sr¡8ug ur lerrleuue¡8un a¡e uoll¡sod slql ur sqra^pe teql azlu -8ooa¡ or lllrgeur ,sluapnts eql '(,¡ooq:s fppmb ar'ea¡ uarPllqr eql) qsl¡8uE ur tou tnq qf,uaJC ur lefueruruer8 are reqr sa¡uetuas lda3f,¿ ot panurruor faqt

l

utoo¿stplJ aqt ut Sututaal a7un&ual puotag

r64

Second knguage learning in the classroom

,ffi

, Ar

Enhoncing the input

Study 20: Processing instruction Bill VanPatten (2004) and his colleagues have investigated the effects of processing instruction, another approach to comprehension-based learning. In processing instruction, learners are put in situations where they cannot comprehend a sentence by depending solely on context, prior knowledge, or other clues. Rather they must focus on the language itself. In one ofthe first studies, adult learners of Spanish as a foreign language received instruction on different linguistic forms, for example, object pronouns (VanPatten and Cadierno 1993). As noted in Chapter 4, VanPatten found that English-speaking learners of Spanish tended to treat the object pronouns, which precede the verb in Spanish, as if they were subject pronouns. Thus, a sentence such as La sigue el señor (literally'her (object) follows the man (subject)') was interpreted as 'She follows the man. Two groups were compared in the stud¡ one receiving processing instruction, the other following a more traditional approach. The processing instruction group received explicit explanations about object pronouns and did some actiyities that drew their attention to the importance of noticing that object pronouns could occur before the verb. Then, through a variety of focused listening and reading exercises, learners had to pay attention to how the target forms were used in order to understand the meaning. For example, they heard or read La sigue el señor andhad to choose which picture-a man following a woman or a woman following a man-corresponded to the sentence. A second group of learners also received explicit information about the target forms but instead of focusing on comprehension practice through processing instruction, they engaged in production practice, doing exercises to practise the forms being taught. After the instruction, learners who had received the comprehension-based processing instruction not only did better

s9r

'E JetdEr{J ur V>ls"r uorl¿f,runruruoJ ur uonr?Jalur luaPnls-tuaPnls eqr I.uou PuB g ruooJss¿lJ ruo{ }drJf,suBJl aql ur Jnor^¿r{ag luepnrs-rer{reat eql Surllrapun ,/v\ar^ Ief,naJoerp eqt sl slql 'ol Surpuaue are fegr Surueatu aqr f.r.rec leqt-saJntf,nJls lpf,neruuer8 agr pue spJo,l.r. al{t-sruroJ a8en8url agr arrnbrr ot sJeuJeel speel uoneno8au 'slseqrodÁ1 uollreralul eqt ot Surproroy '(ffgf) Sulgcear a8en8ue¡ paseg->lset ur a¡duexa ro3 '¡to8 rr¡ncrued r gsrldruoccr ot rarpaSot Sunlrorvt aJE sJauJeal ar{l uarl,/ú. enJt l¡eloadsa sl sFlL 'Surpurrs:apun Fntnru lE aATJJE ol ruaqt sr¡rurad reqr fe,tr e ur ''ote 'suolurdo 'srq8noqr 'suorluelur rlagr r$rre¡c pue ssa.rdxa ot leru uEf, sJeuJeel leqr s.&\oqs uoll -rsrnbcr aSen8ue¡ puofas or saqreordde paseg-uorsuagardruor uo qf,Jease¿ rff,Jeesar aqt Sunardratu¡

'qs"l uorDnpord os¡e

faqr 'dno¡8 uonrnpord ar{t ur

uo IIa,t\

sE

paru-roSrad

sJeuJ¿el ueqr $lser uolsuaqardruoo eql uo

ruoo$sqr arp ut Sutuwal a&an&ual puotag

r66

Second language learning in tlte ckssroom

Negotiation for meaning is accomplished through a variety of modifications that naturally arise in interaction, such as requests for clarification or confirmation, repetition with a questioning intonation, etc. Look for negotiation for meaning in the examples below and compare this with the examples given for the'Get it right from the beginning'proposal.

Example 4 (A group of ).2-year-old ESL students are discussing a questionnaire about pets with their teacher.)

s r s r

And what is 'feed'? Feed?Tofeedthedog? Yes, but when I dont have a ...

Ifyou dont have a dog, you skip the question.

Example 5 (Students from Classroom B, as they settle in at the beginning of the day.)

T sr

How are you doing this morning? I'm mad!

sz

\X/hy?

r s

1

T sI

Oh boy. Yeah, why? Because this morning, my father say no have job this morning. Your father has no more job this morning? Or you have no job? My father.

How different these examples are from the essentially meaningless interaction often observed in classrooms where the emphasis is on 'getting it right from the beginning'. Such genuine exchanges of information must surely enhance students' motivation to participate in language learning activities. But do they,

of this position claim, lead to successful language acquisition? Note, for example, that, although the conversation proceeded in a natural way, the student in Example 4 never did find out what'feed' meant. as advocates

Research findings Most of the early research that examined the 'Lett talk' proposal was descriptive in nature, focusing on such issues as: How does negotiation in classrooms differ from that observed in natural settings? How do teacher-centred and student-centred classrooms differ in terms of conversational interaction? Do task types contribute to different kinds of interactional modifications? Several studies also examined relationships between modifications in conversational interaction and comprehension.

In the mid-1990s researchers began to directly explore the effects of interaction on second language production and development over time. Most of

L9I

'uonrsrnb)E a8en8ue¡ JoJ pnuessa sr lrqr Suruearu JoJ uorl -ello8au slqt f¡asrcard sr lr leql anSre ¡esodo.rd ;¡er s,reT, aqtJo srauoddng '8u¡uearu JoJ uon?no8au sapn¡cur ltr{t af,rlf,E¡d a¡llecrunuJruof aurnua8 Jer{lo r{f,ea JaJo uEf, legr 'rndur ¡erneuuer8 elEJnf,f,B aql qrr^\ Jer{ro rlJea apnord sle,ut¡e touuBr sJauJEel g8nogr¡e teql papnpuor Jalrod pue 3uo1 'llEJe^O 'sroJra ra^/deJ alnpo.rd lagr teql ernsue ol sarun il¿ lB (Jar{leale'r) Ieporu 8uu¡eads-a,urru E 01 pesodxa eg ot peeu sJauJeal regr ruarunSft aqt uonsanb orur pelleo lr asnef,eg t¡nsa; SunsaJalur ue se,l\ srql 'raleads e nru ro peru¿Ape uE r{tr^\ prp legr ueqr ;a>1eads le^al-Jterpeurratur reqroue r{rrr* tou prp sJeuJeel lalel-ererpauJJatur (sr teql 'stxetuof, sJoJJa aJouJ

lue

a>leru

ssoJf,¿ saf,uaJaJlP

s;o;ra

ou

Pa,/\\or{s qcaads JauJ¿el rErF

Punoj PuE slJBls eslEj PuE JerJod pue 3uo1

lrepqmo^ pue prrrerururrSJo rJgunu eqt peuruexa

'ra8uol parsel sJauJeel pef,ue^p" qrrr'r suop -esJeluof, arp asntf,ag l¡rred 's¡aut¡¿d Ia el-arerpeuJelur qtr^\ ueql sJauJeel Ia^el-paJu" p" qtra >llel eJoru parnpord sraurra¡ 'os[V 'sJa>l"ads a,uteu qtvrr plp laqr uer{} sJauJEal Jar{}o qlr^\ aroru pa>llel sJaureal regr puno3 fag¡ 'srrcd uonesJe uol ur sla^el frualcgord ssoJf,e saf,ueJa5lp aqr 8uls,(pue 'suonesJe -uof, ur sraleads aln¿u-uou put e^neuJo qcaads aqr paredruo) JJlJod pue 3uo1 'qsr18uE 3o raleads alneu E I{rl.ry\ raqtout pue 1a>lteds Ie^al-peJue^pe

uE r{lrlrr Jar{roue 're>1eads Ie^al-aterpatuJetul JOr{touE tpl^\ uolresJe^uol E petl raleads la^al-alerpauJalur uE 'a¡druexa roC 'sle^al earqr JI{l Jo I{rEe uroü ra>1eads E r.{tL![ suorssnosrp ate¡edas ul patedtrtued raurml IEnpI^Iput I{]EA

'qsr¡3ug3o sJeuJeal paf,u" pE Jo elerperuJalur aJe \ sra>1eads a^Il¿u-uou ag1'sra>¡eads qsl¡8uE alneu xrs pue 'qsuedg ser'r a8¿n8uel lsry asoq,& qsr¡8ug3o sra>1eads alneu-uou ¿1 :sruedrclued 91 aJa./( aJeql's¡led ul >lstr E Sutur;o3rad sra -ureal tlnpe fq parnpord aSen8ue¡ eql paurruexa (E86I) r:uod EIrInEd pue 3uo1 'uonJeJalur JeuJEal uo selpnrs a,rtrdlnsap f¡rca agr jo auo uI ¡aegcrry sra.ur?q o7 3u141w srauruaT : I Z tpryS

'psodo.rd ,pue eqt ur rq8rr rl rJ), arp qrv't aurl ur eJour sr srsar¡rodlq uorlfeJelur parepdn eqr or luelalal qf,Jeesal .rardrgc srql ur JatBI ees III¡I am se 'lJeJ u1 'Suturau pue tuJoJ uae.üteg suoltf,auuof,

a>leru ol sraurea¡ Surdlaq ur aloJ ¡ennrc e le¡d or percIlag sI teql aJnrEeJ auo sE pagriuapr ueeq ser{ >prqpaal e^nf,arJoJ '8ulurca1 oTEIIIIf,EJ or l¡a1r¡ lsour are lerlt uonf,eratur Jo seJnlreJ pue (uolrualle 'aldluexe ro3) Sulurea¡ a8en8ue¡ puooas ot alnqrJluof, ler{l sal}IJedeo raurea¡ sale¡8alur uoIsJeA parrpdn aqr '(€g6t 3uo1) ruaudo¡a,rep aSen8uel puof,as satouo¡d uolrreJalul lruolres -raluor teqr 8u¡rers uorsre ¡tutSuo eqr qrl^\ paredruo3 '(7 -rardeq3 aas) srsaqrodlq uonrerelur eW Jo uorsral perepdn (9G6) s,3uo1 ¡aeqcry.q lq pate rtoru aJE pue s8untas froreroqe¡ uI lno paIJJ¿f, uaoq a^EI{ selpnts osaql

utoottspp aql ut Sututaal a&an&ual puotag

168

Second language learning in the classroom

Study 22: Learner language andproficiency leuel George Yule and Doris Macdonald (1990) investigated whether the role that different proficienry-level learners play in a two-way communication task led to differences in their interactive behaviour. They set up a task that required ñvo learners ro communicate information about the location ofdifferent buildings on a map and the route to ger there. One learner, referred to as the 'sender', had a map with a delivery roure on it, and this speaker's job was to describe the delivery route ro rhe 'receiver' so that he or she could draw the delivery route on a similar map. The task was made more challenging by the fact that there were minor differences between the two maps.

To determine whether there would be any difference in the interactions according to the relative proficiency of the 40 adult participants, different types of learners were paired together. One group had high-proficiency learners in the 'sender' role and low-proficiency learners in the 'receiver' role; the other group had low-proficiency'senders' paired with high-proficiency 'receivers'.

\lhen

low-proficiency learners were senders, interactions were considerably longer and more varied than when high-proficiency learners were the senders. The explanation for this was that high-proficiency senders tended to act as if the lower-level receiver had little contribution to make in the completion of the task. As a result, the lower-level receivers were almost forced to play a passive role and said very little. \X/hen lowerJevel learners were the senders however, much more negotiation for meaning and a greater variety of interactions between the two speakers took place. Based on these findings, Yule and Macdonald suggest that teachers should sometimes place more advanced students in less dominant roles in paired activities with lower-level learners.

Study

23:

Zhe dynamics

ofpair uorh

In a longitudinal study with adult ESL learners in an Australian universiry Neomy Storch (2002) observed the patterns of interaction between 10 pairs of students completing different tasks over one semester. She identified four distinct patterns of interaction: 'collaborative' interaction consisted of two learners fully engaged with each other's ideas; 'dominant-dominant' interaction was characterized by an unwillingness on the part of either learner to engage and/or agree with the othert contributions; 'dominant-passive' consisted of one learner who was authoritarian and another who was willing to yield to the other speaker; and 'expert-novice' interaction consisted of one learner who was stronger than the other but actively encouraged and supported the other in carrying out the task. To investigate whether the four rypes of interaction led to differences in learning outcomes, Storch identified learning events that occurred during the interactions (for example, learning that the definite article is used with the names of some countries). Then she looked at whether that language knowledge was maintained in

69r

JoJ slxaluoJ alBJauaS pFo.{r l?ql auo se uasor{f, sE^\ 3rdol aql dJlunof Jrer{l ur suJalgoJd lrluaruuoJrlue passnf,srp lagr gcrqm ur sanrlnf,E leuonf¿Jelur ur paSe8ua s¡uepnrs 'puelreql ur sesselr a8enSue¡ u8laro3 e se gsr¡3ug ur sellr^n3e dnorS-¡eus pue -.rred3o esn eql pare8rrsa,rur (VOOZ) q8nouoqcla¡ rury uolrceralur erpJo uorsral petepdn aql ol tue^elal lpnrs e u1 'srsaqtodlq uoo¿sstp x?ql ? ut uotlJ?talu, Jaut?"1-¿auJ?aT :97 [?wS

'tuaudo¡a,rap Zjot spEJI uorlreratur peterlo8au reqr slsaqrodlg aqr .roj rroddns se pata;dratur aJE stlnseJ esaql 'qser luaul¿aJt aql JerJe qruour auo paJatsrurup¿ slset-tsod pafe¡ap aqr uo paure¡ureru sB^\ sJolo?Jatul eqr ro3 ruaudo¡a^ep ur eseeJf,ur tuecglu8ls eqr ter{r salou os¡e la>1ce¡rq .a¡rrr¡ l.ra,r. pa8uegc orfv\ 'sJauJEa¡ dnor8 IoJruoJ arp or relrturs eJa.&\ spardr.ro5 ar{t pu¿ sre^Jesgo ag1 '(¡orruo3 pue'spardlrcg's.rauasgg 'a'r) uoncerarur ul aSe8ua sJauJeel ueqr ruarudola^ap uorteruJo3 uollsanb Jreqt ur ssa¡8o¡d

tou pp oq^, PeurElsns

eJou PslEJtsuouep sJrp?JJun Jotf,¿Jalul puE sJolf,BJerul qrog 'slset

aql ¡e para¡druoc tnq qs¿l er{t Jo fu¿ ul aledlclued rou prp orl,{a sJeureel jo dnorS lorruo3 E oslB sB,/v\ eJeql 'are1d >1oot Suruselu JoJ uollenoSau ou snq] pue JnDo lou plp su^\op>leaJq uonef,runururof ter{l Jauueru palletap e r{fns ur pardl.rcs prc pe5 -r¡druls ueeq ptr{ rrqr aBrnBuEI pesn s;aleads elrleu er{r tnq sra>1eads a neu eql qrl^\ $lsel arues aqt tno parJJef, ,spaldrrcg, aqr '7 dnorg ur sraureal 'le,na. lue ur toeJalur rou pp laqr rnq >lsel er{t tno palrrer lagr se ra>1eeds alneu eql Pue JauJ"al aqt or uelsrl or Pa>lsE eJe,/r^. ,'sJe^Jesqo, aqr 'E dnorS ur sJauJEe-I ('sarpeeJufl Jotf,eJelul eql sE ol paJJaJaJ JJa \ snqt pue sruJoJ uonsanbjo uon -lsrnbce Jrar{r ur perue^pe se lou a.rartr laqt rnq 1 dno;g ur sJauJeel se lndul pa5lporu atues er{l palraf,al ¿ dnorS ur sJeuJea-I 'sJeuftal ar{r JoJ Suluraur '$rrcp ot rq8nos laqr se a8en8uel rrar{r pa5poru or{ \ 'sra>1eads e neu r{1r,& s>lsel aqr lno parJJEf ,'sJolreJetul, se oJ peJJaJeJ'1 dno.r3 ur sJeuJ?al aql 'sdno¡8 alg otur pepplp ueql eraly\ ÁtyL'Z.rerdeq3 ur paqrJ3sap s? 'suorl -senb Sulu¡tal ur peqleal peg laqr a8ets aqr3o suJJal ur passasse eJe.&\ sJauJ¿al aqt 'DISEI agr ur Suned¡on¡ed ot JorJ¿ 'suonsanb acnpord ol sJauJeel JoJ slxal -uoc apu'ord or pau8lsap are,4a S>lsEl aql 'gsr¡8ug 3o sra>1eads e^nBu r{tr^r Sulcuanbas a¡nl¡rd pue uorralduoc l¡ots 'alduexa -lo3 '$lset eln€f,runruuror rueraglp ur a3¿3ua ol -ISg Jo sreur"el rlnpe pe>lse (666D falce¡¡ uosrly ruautdo¡anap aSanSuq puoras?u" uolltpratuJ :re [?n4S 'a8pali'rou13o

uonfnJtsuof,-of, aqr ul a8e8ua l¡n3ssaccns uec faqr 'drqsuone¡ar ef,rlou -l¡adxa ue ur eJe sJauJeal pue f¡a,urerog¿llol suonlunJ >1rom rrcd uaq^\ tBr{r trrrclf, ar{r pue (r/ rarderl3 aes) ruarudola,up a,rnruSoc 3o ,,lroeqt s,Qslo8l¡ ro; rroddns sE srr{} sle¡d¡elur qlJots 'tseal aqr paurelur"ur s¡r¿d a,rrssed-tueu -ltuop pue lueurruop-lueunuop aqr ur paredl¡lued oq./( sJeuJEeT 'aru¡ Je o a8pa¡,lou1 JrerpJo eJou paurelureu s¡¡¿d acl,rou-l¡adxa pue a^nrJogel Z-I rBr{r punoJ r{Jrors ¡ser ruanbesqns E

loo aql ur paredlcnred ogz'r sreureel

ruoo$spp at¡l ut Sututaal a&arcSuq yuotag

t70

Second language learning

in the classroom

the use of conditional clauses such as 'If people didnt leave water running while brushing their teeth, they would save an estimated 5-10 gallons each time' (p. 213).Learners were audio-recorded as they discussed the environmental problems.

The recorded conversations were examined to see the extent to which students used interactional features that are believed to facilitate second language learning, for example, negative feedback (i.e. clarification requests, explicit correction, and recasts) and modified output (i.e. a learnert more accurarcl complex reformulation ofhis or her previous utterance). Learners were tested on their abiliry to produce conditional clauses in a pre-test, an immediate post-test, and a delayed post-test.

McDonough found that learners who had used more negative feedback and modified output in their interactions significantly improved in the accuracy of their conditional clauses. Those who made less use of these features did not. McDonough also explored opinions about the usefulness of pair work and small-group activities, asking whether such activities contributed to learning. She found that the students did not perceive pair- and grouPactivities as useful for learning English. This was true both for students who seemed to have made effective use of the interaction for learning and those who had not. The fact that learners were sceptical of the benefits of groupand pair-work activities suggests a need to take account of learners' beliefs about learning (see Chapter 3) and to share with them our reasons for using these activities.

Interpreting the research Research based on the interaction hypothesis has investigated factors that contribute to the quality and quantity of interactions between second

language learners. It has provided some useful information for teaching. Certainly, the studies by Long and Porter, Yule and Macdonald, and Storch contribute to a better understanding of how to organize group and pair work more effectively in the classroom. The Mackey and McDonough studies are two examples of research that have measured second language development in relation to different aspects of conversational interaction. Mackey's study used one-on-one pair-work activities between trained native speakers and non-native speakers focusing on a single grammatical feature in a laboratory context. Thus it is difficult to relate the findings to the kind of interactions that take place in classrooms. The McDonough study helps to fill this gap because it is a classroom study that also demonstrates the benefits of interaction on second language learning over time.

Recentl¡ a number of laboratory studies have also examined the effects ofl different interactional features on specific aspects ofsecond language learn-i ing over time. Several studies have shown that implicit corrective feedbackl

tLt

'&l¡q" a8en8ue¡ puof,as pue sllDIS f,ruapef,B rreqt qroq dole.nap ilyur stuepnls reql peunsse l¡durs sr tr 'uonf,nJtsu paseg-luetuof JoJ slxeluof lueur u1 s8urpug rlrrtasa¿ 'o¡4]

JO

rc¿(, e urpr^r aprru l¡ensn sr a8¿n8ue¡ lrrroleru aqr 01 uonrsu€rl Jr{1 lnq '.,nou1 fpea-r¡e laqr a8en8ue¡ e30 esn euJos 1y\ollE tEqt saruu¡e¡8o¡d uonef,npa F.Srlllq ol ssef,f,e a,reg leu stuapnls rar{to 'a8en8ue¡ Ál¡oleu aqr g8no.rgr lluo 8ul¡oor{Js ot sseJJE eAEr{ ueuo stuapnls 'uone¡Snurur Jo serJlunol uI 'uonernpe;o a8en8ue¡ aql se uasoqo sr a8¿n8uel auo os 'sa8en8uel IEOoI IIE ur lou aJe slerJJleru leuonef,npa 'sJar{to u1 :a.,vrod FruoloJ snol,ra¡d e

alq"lr¿Ae

(sernunof, aruos ur 'a¡druexe 3o a8en8ue¡ aqr sr Surloogcs jo e8en8uel l¡uo rr{l JoC 'alqEIrEAE sr uorldo raqto ou ta J^{oq 'suortenlrs leuorruJnpa lueu uJ

'a8en8ue¡ puo3es B ur uononJtsur poseg-ruetuof elrarer or (ruagr JoJ asoor{f, slua¡ed .uaqr ro) Jsoor{f, stuapnls 'saruu¡e¡8o¡d fIfC pue uorsrauul uI

'erun e(ues aqr re a8rn8u?l eql pue tuatuof, JatlEuJ rralgns aqt 8ul -uJeel ',auo JoJ o^\1, la8 u¿¡ sluapnls rrr{r sr rpeordde srq¡Jo uortetoadxa aq1 'e8en8ur¡ aruor{ (stuapnts or uonrppe ul sa8en8ue¡ aJour Jo o./r\-l ur uonf,nJtsur Sul.rego lq raqrrry srqr puarxa slooqls ueadorng aql sE rlrns saurue¡8o¡d Ieuorlrf,npa rar{ro 'g rardeq3 ul g lpnrg ur paqrrf,sap adornE ur sarurue¡8 -ord (1¡3) Sururea¡ pater8arul-a8enSur¡ pue rueruof, el{r pue saruru¿¡8o¡d uorsJeurrur 'a¡durxa ro3 's8ulDas IruollJnJtsul Jo óalre,t lea¡8 r uI petuaru -aldrur s¡ r1 'aBenBuEI rer{t ur rq8ner rall¿ur reafgns lpnrs faqr se a8en8uel u8laro3 Jo puof,es e a¡lnbce sJauJral 'Surgcear aSen8ut¡ peseq-ruJruof, uI

auo ¿o{oml

pg ,

'8ulu.ree¡ a8rnSue¡ puof,as uo >lreqpaal elnrarrof, rrcrldxa

eJouJo sloaga aqr pare8nsa^ur e^eq leqt uorllsod (pue eqr ul rq8rr lI leg, eqt or Palsler sJrPnls luoorssBlJ lE >lool III¡I a¡,r rardegr srql uI ratel '8urgt arues aqr 3uúes jo le,r rarpoue lsnl se Jaqler rng uroJ a8en8ue¡ rraql rlerrof, ol ldu¡eur uE sE sJeuJEa¡ aqr lq pallac;ed ag rou letu stse¡a¡ (sJaqf,Eat eql 'uoll -f,nJlsur Jelleru-relgns g8norgr Suru¿au Surssa¡dxa uo sI snf,oJ lruolrfnJrsul eqt uaq.4 'g .rardeq3 ur pauJeel a,t\ sV'Ja^a,l.loq 'es?J al{t sfe,r'r¡e tou sI srql 'f:e¡nrre uo snfoJ E pue uonf,nJlsul rrruuer8 ¡euoltlpeJt ol peruorsnf,f,E aJJ \ sraureal rEqL egr asnrreq pef,rlou uaeq a eq or l¡a1t arour ere.&\ (ryrqpaa; 'lpnts uoorsse¡r suBnouoOlIAJ uI

e nJaJJof Jo sruJoJ raqro pur)

lpualssuor tseral

sr ruJoJ

ere stsef,ar esnef,eq aq

feru

auo

slsEJaJ

'(tOOZ rpedg pur 'uz'roqrg8rl 'se¡oqer¡) l¡uo3l l¡-re¡ncrrred '>lrorvr. rred uI ruaIIBS aJouJ

s¡lt '(/002 oo3 pue da1:eyrq) Suluas frort.loqel

aqt ul tsa8uoJls aJ? slsef,al JoJ sr3eJe a,ulsod eq] reqr sruJguol qf,Jeesal sII{l Jo ^/v\ar^al tueseJ v'lBrsgaueq sr suorlBnlrs >porvl-rrcd ul (stsmar 'alduexa.roj) utoo"tssyp aql ut &urutaa1 aSan&ual Vuocag

172

Second language learning in the chssroom

In recent

years, researchers have sought

to examine this assumption more

critically. Study 26: French immersionprograrnrnes in Canada Research in Canadian French immersion programmes is often cited in support of the'Get rwo for one' proposal. Most immersion programmes are offered in primary and secondary schools, but some universities also offer content-based instruction that expands opportunities for students to use their second language in cognitively challenging and informative courses.

tü/hat have the studies shown?

In terms of populariry and longeviry French immersion has been a grear success. Thousands of English-speaking Canadian families have chosen this

option since its first implementation in the 1960s (Lambert and Tucker 1972), both in areas where French is spoken in the wider communiry and in those where French is rarely heard outside the classroom. Numerous studies have shown that French immersion students develop fluenc¡ high levels of

listening comprehension, and confidence in using their second language. They also maintain a level of success in their academic subjects that is comparable to that of their peers whose education has been in English (Genesee 1987). Over the years, however, educators and researchers began ro express concern about students' failure to achieve high levels ofperformance in some aspects of French grammar, even after several years of full-day exposure to the second language in these programmes. Some researchers argue that the difficulry French immersion learners experience in their L2 production shows that comprehensible input is not enough (Harley and Swain l9B4). They claim that the learners engage in too little language production because the classes are largely teacher-centred. Students are observed to speak relatively little and rarely required to give extended answers. This permits them to operate successfully with their incomplete knowledge of the language because they are rarely pushed to be more precise or more accurate. tü/hen students do speak, communication is usually satisfactory in spite of numerous errors in their speech because the learners' interlanguages are infuenced by the same first language, the same learning environment, and the same limited contact with the target language outside the classroom. Teachers also tend to understand students' interlanguage, so there is rarely aneed to negotiate for meaning. Such successful communication makes it difficult for an individual learner to work out how his or her use ofthe language differs from the target language.

Another explanation for students' lack of progress on certain language features is their rarity in French immersion instruction. For example, Merrill Swain (1988) observed that even history lessons, where past tense verbs might be expected to occur, were often delivered in the 'historical present' (for example, 'The ships go down to the Caribbean; they pick up sugar and

8.Lt

stxel eql pEeJ ol aruoo stuapnts euJrl aql lq ter{t os rq8ner-ard l¡¡enuassa are laqr 'parelsueJl tou eJp slxel aqr, elrq,tr'regt pa,uasgo uosugof 'uorsuaqard -uor rrer{l tsrsst ol asaurr{J ur stJeql pue satou f.reruaua¡ddns qlr,l.r. stuapnts peprr\ord pue (serJpuonf,rp lEn8urllg Jo asn arp pa8eJno3ua 'JEruruErS aqr pegllduls 'peo¡ ,{.re1nqe)o^ eqt parnpeJ 13 rT 'stxet puaqarduof, stuapn}s d¡ag or sar8ale.ns 3o lrarrr,r e palo¡dua s.raqf,Eat 'srgt roj aresuaduoo o¿ 'gsll8uE ur sllDls lcerarrl fue tnoqrr.u looqrs lrepuo:as jo ,reaf rsrg er{r or eruef, sluepnrs lue14¡ 'slez'r ¡etululru ur lluo qsrlSug ur rarpo r{f,Ea qtr^\ pue reqf,Eot eqt qtr^\ pelrtrelur sluepnls reqt pue sraqf,EelJo qraads eqt ur pereu -ruoperd xrry puc JSaurqC ter{r pal"J^eJ serpnls uJooJSSEIf IEuonE^JasqO '(asaurg3 pur qsl¡8uEjo uorreurquor e) (xrry, pue 'eseurr{J 'qslSuE jo palsrsuof, leqt >llet Jer{feel se,/\l. uJar{rJo auo 'seruue¡8o¡d uors¡au¡rul qsrpug aseqt ur ssa¡8o¡d cnsrn8url arenbape aleru ol sreureel Jo lllrgrur eqr ot petngrrtuor sJnor^Er{eg crSo8epad lera^as teql pan8re a¡1 lcuarcgord qsrpuE u,,'to Jrer{t ur suonelruIllJo asneleq tueluoo agt Surra,rrlap lla,rrrrage ur sauprll¡p (sreqreet pa^rasgo osle eH d¡nyssac -f,ns runln3u.rnr ¡a,ra¡,fiePuof,as aqr 01 PePeeu fruarcyo.rd gsr¡8ug aqr ^\olloJ pe>ptl sluepnts ter{t patou eH 'seuur€r8ord qcns roJ spuptuep aqt taeru ol agrSo lrr¡q¿ ar{r rnoqe sureruor pasrer (¿661) uosuqof uarsls Fuonernpe 8uo¡ 3uo¡1 ur sesselr uorsreururr qsr¡3ug arrl

qrra¡

's¡ooqcs frepuoras

ur sJnorlerleq Sulu.ree¡ pue Surgoeal uo r{fJ¿asal er{t Jo atuos Sulr'terlal uI 'usr¡en8urlrq qsrlSuE -eseurr{J Jo 1a,o1 g8¡q e Sululrtureu jo po8 s lueururelo8 SuqE 3uo¡1 et¡r rllr^\ luJlsrsuor Suraq se uaas osle eJa,,'r laql 'lrrunuruoo I¿uorlEuJatur eql ul l¡eclruapele pue l¡euorssa3ord paacrns ol ueJpl¡{f, rrarp patur,l.r or{,l.r slua¡ed asaurr{J qrrr'r re¡ndod a¡artl. saruue¡8o¡d uorsJeuruJl qsr¡8ug are¡ asaql '(91-¿ saperS) Iooqrs l.repuocas re qsr¡8ug ur pue (9-1 saperS) Iooqrs .&eul¡d ur aseuolue3 ur perpnrs stuepnrs 3o lruofeur aqr qlrqr'r ur auo or asauotue3 ur ro gsr¡8uE ur lla,rtsn¡cxe JeIpIe palpnts sluapnrs qllq¡a ur euo ruo5 peloru 8uo¡ 3uo¡1 ul ruatsfs puonernpe eqt s096I aqr uI Suoy 3uo17 ut ssa"qs n?un uorsrautu? awT :/e t?us '(lesodo.rd ,pue aql ur rq8lr tl ta3, aqr aas) sarnlraJ a8en8ue¡ re¡nrnred uo uonf,nJlsu pasn)oJ-ruroJ ruorj rgaueq plp srau#el 'a8enSue¡

ar{lJo seJnlea3 :rreru8e.rd Sulpn¡cur 'serpn¡s ¡etuarulradxa euros u1 'ruro; aBenBuEI uo pesnroJ terp uononrrsur lg patuaua¡druor eg ol papeau uonf,nJtsur Jeuerrr rralqns reqr parsaSSns se,l\ rr 'l¡8utsea.rru1 'a8e arues agr jo sraleads alrleu Suoru¿ uonfeJaturJo prldÁ Jq plno,/v\ reqr sa¡lrs gceads agr ol ssaof,E eAEr{ tou plp a8en8uel aqr ol a¡nsodxa ruooJsstlf, l¡uo rplm sJaurcal reqr parou (566ü ul" \S IIuraW puE euorel euIEI[ d¡erurdordde tI asn tou plp sluepnrs (uononJlsur uorsJauul Jo s¡eaf JaUE ua^a teqr sasself ut ,(1art.t os pesn se,&\ pnpr^rpur uE ssaJppt l¡arr¡od or snoa unouo¡d uos¡ad puores aql '(,"' pue¡8ug or >prq rr aler laqr Jo asn aql reqt punoJ Oeeü rars/1fo¿ ruoo¿sspp at¡t ut Sututaal a&an&ury puocag

t74

Second knguage learning in the chssroom

for themselves the more able students at least are sufficiently familiar with the content to be able to deal with them' (p.177).Although these strategies helped students understand the content, they may not have helped them learn to use the syntactic and discourse structures in the second language to establish form-meaning relationships. Therefore it is not surprising that the standards of reading in English at age 15 were reported to be significantly lower than those for Chinese. At the same time, however, the educational outcomes for Hong Kong students in content subjects continued to be high, comparable to, and in some areas superior to, achievements in other developed countries. In addition, the levels of Chinese Ll reading proficiency remained high. In spite of professional development efforts to help teachers achieve the dual goals of language and content instruction, Philip Hoare and Stella Kong (2008) find that many teachers in the Hong Kong immersion programmes continue to have difficulty implementing immersion pedagogy. They attribute this in part to the pressure teachers feel in a society where performance on examinations is paramount. To ensure that their students do well on the content exams, teachers often feel that they must teach in Chinese or in a simplified English that does not give students access to the language that is appropriate for highJevel academic work. Study 28: Dual immersion

In recent years, legislation has limited the availabiliry of bilingual education for most minoriry language students in the United States. In most states, English language learners' education must take place entirely in English, or with only minimal support for learning through their first language. As we saw in Chapter 1, the result ofthis approach is often subtractive bilingualism. Children gradually lose their first language or fail to develop it for academic purposes. In addition, they often fall behind in their academic work because they do not yet have the English language skills needed for dealing with the gradeJevel subject matter. Some jurisdictions allow 'dual immersion' as an exception to the strict enforcement of instruction through English only. In dual immersion, minoriry language students learn English in classrooms where English-speaking children also learn the minority language students' home language. Patsy Lightbown (2007) observed classroom interaction and learning outcomes in a school where an equal number of native English- and native Spanishspeaking students shared the classrooms. Starting in kindergarten, half their instruction was delivered in English by an English native speaker and half in Spanish by a native speaker of that language. Teachers coordinated closely to ensure that the subject matter instruction in the two languages was complementary rather than redundant. Students' performat.. ot a variety of measures administered through Grade 3 showed that the programme was

9Lt

>lJo1!\

ot Peq Jar{lEer aqr rErfl tuaPne

sE,/r\

1I

(uossal salPnrs FI)os ¿ tuoS ErEP

uone^rasqo eqr q 'qruaJC uanrr^\ arnpord ol pue puersrapun or ÁIIqe pue 'sleuetBru leuonfnJtsul pasfpue 'salll^Ilf,e leuoll lsep rar{rrel eql aprseq foq eqr s1 s sraqf,eal eqt aprsag loq aqr s1 J reqreer eqr rprsag sl loq aqr oq s

¿>lsap ¿>lsap

(aue8 ¡eas pue aplH,) g aqduuxg

'lln3SIP lra,t pug sraleads r{3uary reqr Surgrauos 's, a^rssessod aqr el¿lrurr lou saop ruepnrs eqr reqr tela,l\oq'aloN 'suonsanb 7 a8er5 Sulcnpo;d ulSaq or lprar tsorule sr luapnls aql terp srseSSns uonf,BJatur aql'satetnul ruapnrs aqt teqr uouraJJof, 7 a8rrg e sapnord reqf,Eal aql pue 'uonsanb E a8er5 E $lse ruepnts ar{r 6

alduexE uJ

)or

,¿1e,ra1-rr1ds E

asnoq alrJno^EJ

rnol

s1, 'JEep

'¡a,ra1-rr¡ds y r s rr,:on I

salun o^\t ,sl, Sulles

¿¡a,ra1-r¡ds E sr asnoq

alrrno

eJ

r"Jt+ ::

(sacuarajard asnoq tnoqe Jagto l{f,¿e Suvrrarrrrarul)

g aTduoxE ruoorsspp aql ut Sututaal a8an&ual puotag

180

Second knguage learning

in the ckssroom

Study 31: Readies, unreadies, and recasts Alison Mackey and Jenefer Philp (1998) investigated whether adult ESL learners who were at different stages in their acquisition of questions could advance in their production of these forms if they received implicit negative feedback (i.e. recasts) in conversational interaction. fu described in Chapter 5, recasts are paraphrases of a learner's incorrect utterance that involve replacing one or more of the incorrect components with a correct form while maintaining a focus on meaning. The researchers were interested in discoveringwhether adult learners who received modified interaction with recasts were able to advance in their production ofquestion forms more than learners who received modified interaction without recasts. Furthermore, they wanted to explore whether learners who were at more advanced stages of question development ('readies') would benefit more from interaction with recasts than learners at less advanced stages of question development ('unreadies'). The results revealed that the'readies' in the interaction plus recasts group improved more than the 'readies' in the interaction without recasts group. However, the 'unreadies'who were exposed to recasts did not show more rapid improvement than those who were not exposed to recasts. Study 32: Deuelopmental stage andfirst l"anguage influence Nina Spada and Patsy Lightbown (1999) have also investigated the acquisition of questions in relation to learners' developmental 'readiness'. French-speaking students (aged ll_12) in intensive ESL classes received high-frequency exposure to question forms that were one or two stages beyond their developmental level. Learners who were judged on oral pretests to be at Stage 2 or 3 were given high frequency exposure to Stage 4 and 5 questions in the instructional input.

The materials that contained the more advanced question forms were designed ro engage the learners mainly in comprehension practice. There was no student production and thus no corrective feedback, nor was there any

explicit instruction on question formation. The researchers wanted to know whether Stage 3 learners (i.e. those considered to be developmentally'ready') would benefit more from the high-frequency exposure to Stage 4 and 5 questions than the Stage 2 learners, who were not yet developmentally'ready'. Learners'performance on an oral post-test measure indicated no advantage for the Stage 3 learners. In fact, there was little progress for either group. However, on a task that required learners to judge the grammaticaliry of written questions there was evidence that all students had some knowledge of Stage 4 and 5 questions. A more detailed examination of the learners' performance on this task showed that students tended to accept Stage 4 and 5 questions when the subject ofthe sentence was

a

pronoun (for example,

'Are you a good student?'

or

''When are you going to eat breakfast?'). \W4ren the subject of the sentence was a noun, however, there was a tendenry for students to reject higher stage questions (for example, Are the students watching TV?' or 'V/hat is your brother

IBI

' (ySSt uolllruEH :886I uoslaN pue'¡ag'uErU>Irg :8002 umoqrq8ll pue reuury) rq8ner a.rar'r lagr la^al aqt puolaq sesnelf, rllt€lar

esn ol ,/vror{ uJeel ua,ra lagr seouetsur auos uI .Lrau1 fprarp laql (s)auo agr pue rq8ner euo aqr uaa^\taq (s)uorrrsod asnell elnelar arp arrnbce os¡e larp 'tq8net sr l€q.lvr ureal lluo rou faqr 'le^al tuaJJnJ .rreqt puolaq sa8rrs ¡era,Las aJ€ tpr{l sasnElf a,urrlar rq8nrt are (uorrrsod rralqns ur lluo sosnelf eArtEIeJ Jsn or{./v\ asoqt 'aldruexa ro3) s;au.rea¡ la^el-aol uar{^\ rEr{r rsaSSns serpnts asaql Jo stpsed 'sesnelf, e^neleJJo uorlrsrnbce Jrerp ur ssa.lSo¡d (sJeuJeel a8en8ue¡ puof,es egrrosep or (¿ raldeq3 aas) lgcre.rarq lrr¡rgrssecrr eqr pasn e Erl terp serpnts Iera^es sepnlrur srql 'ueu llpruaurdo¡elep sr teq^\ qrear ot ler3ge -ueg sr rl ]er{t rurclf, eqr ot af,uapr^a-Jetunof JaJo ot s¡eadde r{JJ"esJJ aruos

'uolllnJlsul Pesnf,oJ Pe Iaf,aJ oq-/'r sJeuJEa¡ se a8uegr ptuarudola,rap r{fntu sE ^&\oqs tou plp lagr leru raqroru l¡,aq r aro3ag zs 'sa>lBluJeuv r

¿poo8

¿qra^pe ¡no

¿se>lEru rauv rs lnd or aoe¡d reqrouv r et apuuxE '(se>leo

poo8 saleru Jer{totu

ftu serullaruos, :prrog eqr uo pace¡d ueeg sEI{ eruerues SuIAolloJ eql'saf,uet -ues 1v\eu ruJoJ ol PaJePJoeJ aJE sefualuas ul sPJol( aql eJer{,& &l,ulre ue ur paSr8ua arc laqr '91 a¡druexg u1 'qsr13uE Sururea¡ are s;aleads qf,uarC plo -rceÁ-7¡y dnor8 e a;agrrr ruoorsselo E ruo5 ue>let are ZIpue 'I I '0I saldruexE 'u^^.o

ot

sJeuJ¿el .ro3 alqlssodurr l¡¡enr.rr,r eq illr\r

tl

Jrer{l uo sJoJJa erp Ja^ofsrP

'leeJg uonef,runuluroo

'a8en8uel parel{s r¿q} Jo pull lu¿ ot peel ot l¡a>¡¡ rou are srorra arp esnef,eg ruory JeJsuerrJo llnsar aqr l¡rred aJB tetp srorre a>leru ¡rm laqr 'a8en8uel rsrg Jo{ 'luel¡odrur l¡¡eloadsa aq eluEs erF aJBr{s ssBlf E ur sJeuJeel uaqzn'aldruExa

ol patcadxa sr-peqpeeJ a nf,eJJof Jo uolrrnJrsul pesnooJ-ruro3-aoueprn8 qllr{¡a ur suonenrrs3o raqunu e aJE arer{I f¡ucl¡dxa arrnb rg8ner eg ot poeu leu pue rq8ner eg tsnru a8en8ue¡3o st¡adse eruos teql EepI aqr saztserldua tr reqr ur 'rela \oq '¡esodord ,alqerlJeer sl rer¡,l\ I{JEaL eqr ruo5 srag¡p ¡esod -o.rd slgl 'tunof,f,e orul (tuaurdola^epJo a8ers) ssaurpeer sluapnts aql e>pt

or slrrJ Surqcrar aqr JI rq8ner aq touuef, s8urqr aruos tEI{l ,/v\el^ (alqel{real leq^\ r{f?al, arp Jo satBf,o Pe gr¡rrr ae.r8r osp ¡esodord slgr 3o ser?f,o^Pv sr

ruoo¿stplJ ar,p ut Sututaal a8an7ual yuotag

t84

Second language learnirug

in the classroom

approach look for the right moment to creare increased awareness on rhe part of the learner-ideall¡ ar a rime when the learner is motivated to say something and wants to say it as clearly and correctly as possible.

Examplc 11 (The students are practising following instructions; one student instrucrs, the others colour.)

sl T

Make her shoes brown. Now, her shoes. Are those Momt shoes or Dadt shoes?

s2 Momt.

r s

I

Mom's. How do you know Because it's her shoes.

itt

Mom's?

As we saw in Chapter 4, French-speaking learners of English have difficulry with'his' and'her' because French possessives use rhe grammatical gender of the object possessed rather than the natural gender ofthe possessor in selecting the appropriate possessive form. The teacher is aware ofthis and-brief¡ without interrupting the activity-helps the learners notice the correct form.

Example 12 (The students are playing'hide and seek'with a doll in a doll's house, asking

questions until they find out where 'George' is hiding. Although a model for correct questions has been written on the board, the game becomes quite lively and students spontaneously ask questions that reflect their interlanguage stage.) s

r s

r

1 Is George

is in the living room? 'is' You said tvvo times, dear. Listen to you-you said'Is George is in?' Look on the board. 'Is George in the' and then you say the name of the room.

1 Is George

in the living room?

Yeah.

s1 I win! Note that the teacher's brief intervention does not distract the student from his pleasure in the game, demonstrating that focus on form does not haye ro interfere with genuine interaction. Proponents of 'Get it right in the end' argue that it is sometimes necessary to draw learners' attention to their errors and to focus on certain linguistic (vocabulary or grammar) points. However, it is different from the 'Get it right from the beginning' proposal in acknowledging that it is appropriate for learners to engage in meaningful language use from the very beginning of their exposure to the second language. They assume that much of language acquisition will develop naturally out of such language use, without formal instruction that focuses on the language itself.

18r

slsel-lsod 3r{1 IIE uo PunoJ sBlv\ srql 'rou PrP or{1v\ sraureel eql Paurojrsdlno l¡ecrreuerp ruauare¡d gJe^pe uo uonf,nJlsul ucrldxa pelraf,eJ oq \ sJeuJEa-I 'senrlnf,e aonce¡d aqr Surrnp ryeq -peeJ a^nf,aJJoo

sE

IIa^!

sE

aJnronJrs r{f,Ea r{tr^\ palerJosse selnJ ar{tJo Sulqreat

ucrldxa etuos papnllul slql 'porrad >¡aazu.-o,/üt e JJAo suoltsenb ro sgrar'pe uo uonf,nJtsurJo sJnor{ rqSra l¡arerurxo¡dde pa^refal sdno¡3 ptuarurradxa ag¡ 'uonf,nrtsur

pasnf,oJ-ruro3 ¡eroads arp roJ pasn oq o] slEIrarEU polSo8epadSo les E Jar{JEal gcea a,l,e8 sJar{rJEesJJ ar{I 'uonf,nJlsur Jrer{lJo ¡ecldlr e.ra,&\ leql

sarlr^nf,e elnef,runuruJoc re¡n8ar eqr ur aredlcn¡ed or panunuof, sruopnls

'uonfn;rsut ptcads jo por.rad IIE'stueruuedxe aqrSo porrad aqr rnoq8norrT erp JerJE pue aJoJeq parset aJa¡a sdno¡8 uosl¡edtuo¡ pue letuaul.radxa qrog '(¿ rardrq3 aas) sa8ers ¡eruaudo¡a,rap or pre8ar grrm llre¡ncrr-rrd 'a¡qe¡¡EAE aJa,^a etrp uostredruof, olqrJaplsuof, pur eJnt?Jelrl aqr ur pale8usa,rut l¡a,rrsualxa ueeg e^Er{ laqr asnereg.,(pnrs puoles erp roJ parcales ara^\ suonsen| 'qruar¿ pue qsl¡8ug ul raglp ruaru -are1d q.ra pE .roJ salnr plol f¡rrcr¡dxa ]ou are,r faqr 31 (a8en8ue¡ rsry ^\oq .rrarp) rlcuarC qllr\\ luelsrsuof, selnJ tueruef,eld qra,tpe Sutsn ul tslsrad ppo,& sraureal lpql sE,^ó, srsagrod,(q aql '(,pear pue "' ualsll lsnf, uI ¿1 fpnrg pur ¿ rardeq3 aas) passnrsrp ueeq lpear¡e e^el{ rEI{r I{ruarC pue gsr¡8uE ueaataq seruereglp aqr Jo asnerag uolt¿Sllsa,rul roJ tuaruaoeld qra.Lpe porrales JtrqlN erpÍ1 (pnrs rsry er{r ul 'uolr¿ruloj uonsanb put luaruaf,e¡d q.ra,rpe

or lcadsa¡ qtv'r paultuBxe eJa.^a >lleqpea; alllf,aJJor pue uoltf,nJrsul PasnJoJ -ruJoJJo slrege agr 'sasse¡c30 JJqunu Jalltrus e qlvvr selPnts ¡etuarutradxa u1

'lrxalduoc

pue loerncce cttstn8ul¡ gttrtr

srua¡go;d aAEq ol panulruof, feqt 'ra,ra,Lro¡1 'qsl18ug uI eJuePguor e IlEf,Iu -nurruol pue uorsuaqe¡druo¡ Sutuarsrl poo8 pado¡a,rap sJeuJeel 'sJSs?lJ aseql u1 'rndur a¡g¡suar¡arduoo paIJEA pur I{IIJ Jo uorsl,ro¡d aql PuB 'uollf,eJalul snoaueluods JoJ seltlunr¡oddo 'tuJo; uttlt JeqtEJ Sutuearu uo Pasnf,oJ rEI{l sanr^uf,E uo se/r\ Surrlcear arf Jo stseqdrua aql 'IUJOJ a8en8uel uo Pasnroj f¡a.ru sraqcerl rer{r pa^rasqo (y66t '066t) epedg EuIN PuB u.t.r.oqrq8rl fste¿ 'sasse¡J ge ut sluapnrs ggg'1 rsoru¡e 3un1o.tut sarPnts a,rttdttcsap u1 .SAIIIAIlf,E E^I133

-relul a^Ilsf,Iunlu[UosJo '{1¿ ]f-¡'v q8norqr qsr¡8uE Suru.rea¡ lep ¡oogcs lra,ra lsEJuorlr3runuruoJ 'g ratdeg3 ur patuasa:d sl lpnrs srql tuo5

sTU-I

(sraureel erpJo ld¡acxa uV'(7.62 'd) ,asn a8en8ur¡ rreql uo IFt a^rleroqtllor Dagar pue (paf,npord lagr a8en8uq aqr rnoqe >llel sreur¿al araqa anSo¡elp agr3o r.redfur, '(sg¡1) saposrda pare¡ar-a8en8uplroJ papor pue pegrrrsuert 'poprof,ar selv\ rlf,reesar er{l Jo saseqd Ip ur pmnpo;d srau;ea1 trr{l >llrr eql '

uorsJaA ParEInr.uJoJaJ

aqt lnoqe lpt a^rreJogtllo3 Jrarp uo peseg serJols ¡eulSlro Jrer{r or suorsrlaJ apeu ,(aqr rar{taqa pue euo patrlnr.uro3er eqt pu¿ uorsral ¡eur8rro rlaqt uae^ tag seruaraJlp lnoge pef,nou sluapnls rBI{^\ tno pug or peruB./$. up¡de1 pue urE.{\S '&lupe 8ul¡llou Jrar{r Jo Ile3ar parelnlults B ul ued 1oor oslt stuapnts aq1 l.lors er{t3o uorsra porelnruJoJeJ E LIlIld ueulrl'l peg laqr req,,vr paredruor sluapnls aqr 'll,urre ,Sullllou, B uI telr I d¡a,ure.roqr¡¡oc lrors E eloJ,&\ lagr se sluepnls uorsJelurul rlf,uaJ{ L epeJ1 o^\t Jo ruaurdo¡a,rap a8en8ue¡ eqr pe^resqo (ZOO) upldel uoretls puE ulervis IIIrreW'en8o¡erp u¡ s¡nr¡o Suru¡ea¡ a8rnSue¡ ltrp Bepl aqr pue,üoaqr Frnrlnrolros fq pere^Irory an&oryatp

amtproqrllor q8notqt

untuo swol :g€ [pus

'erns¿eru I"ro alp uo f¡.repu¡s paruro3rad sdno¡8 aarqr ¡¡e lgm uosual aqr eq feru snqt pue arnreal ra8rer aqr uo uoltuaur paznrnpl^¡pul r{]r1v\ sJauJEel IIB PaPr^oJd sa¡crrre;o uonslnf,nJE JBalf, al{r uo srseqdue sgl 'eururueJ ro eurlnf,srru reqtra s¿ patardrarul aq ppol leqt ,elf,rue plrQlq, e ul\oqs PBI{ qfJEaseJ snol¡ta¡d asnBseg a¡qrssod Pesn seunauJos sJeuJEel rEI{l

se llrea¡e se leads ol stuapnrs pa8ernocua JeqJJEasaJ alp 'BIBP aqt3o loernle aql eJnsua ol JePJo uI 'suorssas euo-uo-euo a^Isuelul eaJr{t uI JeI{JJEasaJ eql r{rl^\ letu sruapnls asaql dpnrs ar{r Jo rrrd sgr ut patrdlctued sruapnrs 3o a¡drues-gns perf,elas l¡ruopuer e lluo 'qstt pro Jo aJnleu Sutu¡nsuo¡-arutt asnef,ag 'sr lerll 'rf,ege >lser e se Sulpug sltp stardratur .rarsr(1 'qser er{r Jo uo af,urruJoJ.rad ,sraurea¡Jo suJel ur sdno¡8 ¡etuautradxe aeJqr eqr uee^uaq salueJaglp ruecgruS¡s ou eJe^\ eJar{t te^e^&\oH 'saJnsraru uaulJl(

IEJo er{r

aqr uo dno¡8 slsef,er + uollrnJlsul eqt uEI{t Jauaq l¡ruecgru8ls plp dnor8 srdruo¡d + uononJtsur ar{r 'uolrlppe uI 'Japua8 polteruue¡8 Sulu8tss¿ ut dno¡8 uosl¡edu¡oc arp ueqr alEJnf,f,E aroru lpurcgru8rs a.razrr (uorlrnrtsut pa^ref,er or{,&\ esoqt 'a'r) sdnorS ptuarutradxa eeJl{t

¡e

srsar-rsod aql uO

'JatBI sgluoru aerqt urc8e pue lege l¡alelparurul 'lueruteaJl IEuonJnJlsuI aql eroJeq parsar Ip a;ar*.lagr pue fpnrs agr rnoq8norl{l uolDnrlsul pas¿q-luet -uof Jo arurue¡8o¡d uolsJeurrul qruaJ{ re¡n8a; Jrer{r Panunuoc sdnor8 ¡¡y peqpaal elnf,aJJof, Jou uonrnJrsul Jaqlrau pe Iaf,eJ dno-13 uosl;edruoc aql ou rng uoltf,nJlsul aql pa^raf,eJ dno¡8 ¡etuaulradxa

pue

'peqpeeJ e^nf,aJJof,

ruoz$stp aql w Sututaal a&an&ual puotag

r90

Second language learning

in the classroom

learners to engage in collaborative talk on the language features in question led them to a greater understanding oftheir correcr use.

Study 39: Focus onform in tash-based instruction In a descriptive study investigating the importance of the teacher's role in task-based instruction, Virginia Samuda (2001) explored ways of guiding adult ESL learners' attention to form-meaning relationships by focusing on expressions of possibiliry and probabiliry (for example, 'mighr', 'could', 'irt possible'). In a task design that took learners through a'meaning to form to meaning progression', learners were first asked to work in groups to speculate on the identity of an unknown person (for example, age, gender, occupation) by looking at a set of objects thought to have come from that persont pocket. In carrying out this task, learners were observed to produce expressions of probabiliry and possibiliry such as 'It's possible that he smokes' and 'maybe it's a girl', but few instances of modal auxiliaries (for example, 'must', '-"y') were used.

In the second phase ofthe task, the students were asked to come rogether as a whole group to tell each other what they had decided. During this phase, the teacher acted as a co-communicator and maintained the focus on meaning but gradually shifted to form by using the language that the learners had produced on their own and providing them with alternative ways of expressing uncertainry. Initiall¡ this was done implicitly. For example if a learner said something like ''We think uh 50 per cenr he smokes', the teacher said 'So you're not certain that he smokes?' After each group had presented, the teacher provided a more explicit focus. She drew the learners' attention to other ways of expressing possibiliry and probabiliry by overtly talking about language form as shown in the excerpt below (p. 131).

sr r

Businessman Businessman ninety? OK So you're 90 per cent certain he's a businessman, right? Heret another way to say this. You think itt 90 per cent certain, so you think he must be a businessman. He must be a businessman (writes it on the board). So this (points to 'must be' on board) is showing how certain how sure you are. Not 100 per cent, but almost 100 per cent. 90 per cent.

In the final stage of the task, the students prepared and presented a poster based on their conclusions about the identity of the unknown person to the whole class. During this time, the teacher responded to the content and not the form of their work. 'When the researcher examined the differences between expressions of probabiliry and possibility that the students used in the first stage of this task and compared it with the final stage, there was evidence of improvement in that many more instances of modal auxiliaries were present in the learners' speech.

I6I

purur ur daa;¡ #elnrle pue Sururea¡ alnJ uo srseqdua s¡! ql!/v\ qreo.rdde uopelsueJl Jetuu€JB eqr,o Flldlr aJe sasrf,Jexe ¡er¡letuua8 qlns esnelaq ¡esodold .Suruur8eq eql uo4 rq8¡.r r¡ teg, aLp sluesaJdeJ rqJe^ aqllo turoJ tf,eJJo) eqr qrl/v\ s)u€lq aql ur llrJ, sE qrns órruDe ue'a¡durexe JoJ 'uorsnlf,uof, l€qt peqf,EeJ nol r*oq ure¡dxa pue stuesardar lr ¡esodord Surqreat aqr ql/v\ lr¡,r¡rre qf€a qlle¡'sa!l!^!lle ¡errSo8epad ¿ ¡ ¡o suorrduf,sep rerrq eJe oleg ^

stEsodord

tu¡qtee¡ qllrn se!l!^!p€ l€)ltoteped

qrle¡

,l.ttltrf,v

'seruF ruaraJlp rE rreqp 'Suluearu pue uroJ uo snf,oJ e apr,,'ord qroq lar¡r r€ql ll¿J ar{l ol anP l¡a>il¡ 'uoncnrrsur3o sadlr slpsal II"rJ o Jr{l o.&tt ar{t órretuarua¡druo: aql ot rurod lpnrs srqr Jo 3o 'lsat JEruuJe¡B uau¡rn eqt uo sJauJ"al parrrSarul aqr pauroJradrno 1gg per"losl pellaf,ar oryú sJa -ur¿al aqr PuP >lsEr uonBf,runuruoc IEJO eqr uo srJurEal Icc ParElosr aql paru.ro3radrno 1gg pater8elur pe ralar oq^\ sraureal rEIp ur .IVI Joj ¡¡oddns peltelal osle s8urpug aql 'etun relo saJns¿aul a8en8ue¡ qroq uo l¡rueo pel¿losr pue parzr8arul aqr qloq uI sreurraT aruos

-glu8rs pa,r.ordur sasstlr

I{{

'1g¿ pere.rSarur pelra3er orfü sraureel

aql ueql tsat J¿unuEJS uenl¡r"r ¿ uo a8pa¡r'rou¡ laqt SulralrteJ t? Jatlaq aJar\ (1gg pare¡osra'r) arnrerd a¡.neclunuuof, uJog parercdas aJa./v\ lerp saIlI^IIJE

¡euue¡8 ur aJnlJnJls arussed aqr 3o a8pa¡r'rou>l JIeI{r paurelqo orl.&\ sJauJeel Jaqtaqa aro¡dxa or parue,llaqr ,{¡re¡rulg 'ICC patrlosl pe^lereJ oI{1ú sJeuJeel erp urr{r >lsr} uorlef,runuJuJo3 IBJo ue uo a8pa¡lr.ou>l teql Sur,rar¡la¡ le Janag

aram (1gg pere;8atul 'a'¡) uolrrerarul alllmlunuruJor ut Sult¿dtcltred a¡rgrrr a,rrssrd aqr 3o aSpa¡rrroDl Jrarp PaurErgo og,4a sJeuJsal Jeqlaq,&\ uI PelseJalul aJa./!\ sJeq3fteser ar{r 'snql '(7 rardeq3 aas) ¡emrnar Suunp PaIE IDE asoql sE áruts er{l aJe ssa¡o.ld Sulurea¡ aqr Sulrnp pate^Irf,E aJE IBI{I sassa¡o.rd a¡¡l -ru3oo aql JI peuJ¿el a^¿q ar'r Sulgrauros Jegrüaua.r ot l¡a1l¡ eJour eJE a^\ reqt Eapl arll pue lroaqr Sulssaco¡d arel¡do¡ddB-JaJsueJl lq paruro3ul sem 'a8pa¡r'rou>l ZT Jo spuDl luaraJtlp or peal rq8nu uoll3nrlsul \ r{fJraseJ aqt Sune.tnotu uorlsanb puof,as V

uoltsenb

srql

jo sadlr o,l\t aql Jar{reqa

s¿

'JerEI $leal\ aarqt urc8e pue 'uoltonJtsul JatJe f¡arrrpauul 'uollJnJlsul eJoJag u3o a8pa¡lLorDl Jrel{r uo palsal eJe.&\ sJeuJeal pup uoltonJlsuof a,uss¿d er{l sBly\ aJnrEaJ ra8rcr ag¡ 'uollf,nJlsul Pesnf,oJ-luJoJ P313losl pue parerSarul sE 01 peJJaJar a.re lag¡ 'acllce¡d allteflunurruoo IuoU pareredas Jo saltllltf,e a^Il?3runruruof, ur PePPague sB^\ luJoJ ol uolluell? JaI{reI{^\ Jo suJal uI paraglp IEI{I uolrrnnsulJo sJnol{ ZI qru'r pepl^o¡d a¡aztr sJeureel lsg llnPe '¡e ra rpedg) ruroj ot uolluotte Ia^rl-ar¿rpaurerur Jo sass¿lr ol.r'L'(ZrcZ .sJauJEal ./\^.eJp

ol

acuanbas lEuonf,nJtsur aql uI Jr.un Jeueg e ag

leru araql

Jer{rar{ \ auruJtxe or lpnrs E rno paIJJEJ ul"et r{fJeesal Jer{ PuE epedg eur¡ uo?pn4su? ?aswo!-u,totlo &uruu atil :0, t?o8 utoo"tssqJ aqt ut 8urutua1 a&anSual puotag

r92

Second language learning

in the classroom

that in some cases,an activity is compatible with more than one teaching proposal. For example, if the sentences in the'Fill in the blanks' activity came from an earlier draft of a letter written for a communicative activity, it might be consistent with the'Get it right in the end' proposal because it integrates attention to language form in a meaning-based activity.

I Role-play a conversation between a travel agent and a tour¡st. 2 Memorize a dialogue about buying airline tickets. 3 Underline the past tense verbs while reading a story. 4 5

Arrange illustrations in the correct sequence after listening to a story.

Work with

a partner

to write

a

story based on

a cartoon strip.

ó Rearrange a set of scrambled words to form correct questions. 7 Debate or discuss a topic that was featured in a newspaper article. 8

Watch an episode of Sesome Street.

9 Demonstrate and describe the steps in a science experiment. | 0 lnterview a mystery guest and try to discover his or her occupation. I I Play a game of 'Simon Says'. l2 Work in small groups to choose the ideal candidate for a job. Interpreting the research The overall results of the studies

described above provide support for the hypothesis that form-focused instruction and corrective feedback can help learners improve their knowledge and use of particular grammatical features. There is also compelling evidence that more explicit attention to form is particularly useful within communicative and content-based second and foreign language programmes. This has been confirmed in reviews and meta-analyses of many studies that have investigated the contribution of form-focused

instruction to L2 learning (Norris and Ortega 2000; Spada 2011). Some results also show, however, that the effects of instruction are not always long-lasting. This may be related to whether there is continued exposure ro a linguistic feature in the regular classroom input after the experimental treatment ends. -We

have also seen that form-focused instruction may be more effective with some language features than with others. For example, the successful learn-

ing of the tuluous distinction in Lyster's (1994) study could be due to the fact that learning tu and uous is essentially a matter of learning two important vocabulary items and thus may have been less difficult to learn than syntactic features that affect meaning in less obvious ways. In the intensive ESL research, learners may have been more successful after instruction on

e6t

uolrnJtsul Zauory slFSaJ a8pa¡nou11o adlr t¿q^Uo uoltsanb aql ot ra^\sue rcell e eAEr{ luo,lr e,&\ 'sselaqlauoN '(1r rnoqr 1urqt, 01 aurn Surrteq lnoqtr,l.r lplcrnb a8pa¡rrroul -rraqt elarJtor ol sraureel a¡lnba.r teqr qser pa;nsse;d-arun pue $1s31 uorlssrunuJurof der or saJnseaur a8en8uel

zT e nrnlur (sJsuJrel olur lrarre,r ¡alra¡8 E papnllur serl qf,Jeasal tueoaJ

IEJo s3 r{f,ns aSpa¡nou1

jo

,(¡areunr-rog 'stsel rcruru¿¡8 rulod-ara;cslp 'aldruexa JoJ '8ursn aSpay'rou1 l¡¡lTdxa peJnseauJ eAEr{ serpntsSo lrrroleu aqt ur ssarSo.rd,sraureal ssass¿ ot pasn srset eql reqr rlEJ eql ol anp erc uonrnJrsul ZT JoJ srre5a elllsod Sutrrloqs sasl¡eue-eraru ruo5 slFSeJ ar{r teqr an3-re lagr 'aroruJar{lJn¿ d¡uo a8pa¡ltou1 ucr¡dxa ot peel uel uonfnJtsul Z'I r¿ql rupp sJar{f,J?aseJ pue slsrJoer{r aruos

'pasl¡eueun pue elnrnlur eq ol peJaprsuof, sr a8pa¡zrroul ucl¡drul seerar{^,\,'pasfpue pue snorf,suor sE peglrrsap f¡¡mldlr sr a8pa¡rv'ou1 lcr¡dxE 'a8pa¡zrrou>l trcr¡dur snsJe^ urr¡dxa se ro'r.rardeg3 ul pessnJsrp se 'uolllslnbf,E snsJe^ Sururee¡ pue lrJnpolo¡d sns¡a,r elneJelf,ap sE or parraJer l¡snorre,r ueeq e^Erl a8pa¡mou1 Zl uI sarueraglp esaql 'uolr -cnpord aSen8ue¡ snoaueluods pue ¡n;Suluealu uI selnJ arp asn ot ll¡ge aqr tou tnq reruuer8 3o selnr arp Jo a8paproul poo8 l¡le; E ol peal or l1a1r1 sl a¡n¡e.rd e^nrf,runuruJof, rnoqlrlv\ Surqcmr ¡eutue¡3 peseq-elnJ uct¡dxa regr

r'rouq saSrn8ur¡ u8raro;/puof,es Jo sJar{f,Eel 'sI lEqI 'sJeqf,Eel fueru 3o acua -r¡adxa aqr qlLlr seleuoser pue Surn8urul sr a8pa¡,r,r.oul Z'IJo spuDl rueraglp

ol peel 1¿g parerSarur puB paltlosr reqt Sulpug aql 'uoltrnrtsur pastg-Iser urqtv( ruJoJ ol uonualre (sluepnls rra:lp lle,rtrJege urf sJel{feel moq 8ur -lpJrsnlll'1g¿ pare,r8arurSo a¡druexa poo8 3 sI sreureal'ISE llnP" grl¡llpnrs s€pnrrres 'Bu1una171ur eruaraJlp e e>leru os¡e leru uotDnJrsul PasnroJ-LuroJ 3o Sunun aqr terp rapulureJ E sl ICC pet¿losl pur paterSatul uo I{rJEesaU 'sarnleal aSen8ue¡3o sadó qloq ro3 8uturca¡ paroruord uoltJnnsul rror¡dxa reqr uoda¡ (O t OZ) etlruolPuE Eped5 'ra,rar*og 'seJnl¿al a8en8ue¡ ,a¡drurs, pue ,xa¡druof, uo uoltf,nJlsulJo adfr3o stfeJe aqr jo srsf¡uuu-eleru ruef,eJ p uI 'uolrfnJlsul JoJ ta8rcl rartag e ag feu ,¡zrn¡d rr e>pu ol unou BJo pue aqr r€ t- uB tnd, sE qlns ,grunqtJo alnl, a¡durs E pueq Jeqto aqt ug 'rndur eqr uI a¡nsodxa eI^ salfllJe tnoge SuturBJI Jo Jarrag aq leu sJauJeel 'sng1 'urea¡ pue ql"ar or rplgllp f¡snot.totou PuE tlertsgr pue xa¡duor r{toq sr r¡sr¡8uE ut u¡atsds alJIlrE aqr 'a¡druwe roC 'sral{to ueql xa¡duoc aJouJ eJE saJnteal a8en8uel auJos qll^\ patelfosse salnJ al{r f¡eurg 'sJoJJO

paseq-aSen8wl lsJg s(Jal{to qfre efJoJuIaJ pue aSen8ue¡

]sJg aur¿s eqt aJEI{s sJauJeal eJar{^\ sruooJsself, a8en8ur¡ Puof,as uI PesEeJfuI aq

lru ó¡ncg¡p aql 'Zapue IT uea lteq selllrellruls Sulpealsru erc aral{l uaq/!\ l¡-re¡nrlrred 'a8en8ue¡ lsJg (sreureel aqr lq pef,uengur are teqt asoql ere elor plrnrc e &¡d &ru uo¡r¡n¡lsu pasnoo1-ruJoJ qrII{ { roJ saJnleal a8en8ue¡.raqrg 'suortsenb qtr./( uer{t sJauluJalep anlssassod qllry\ uollf,auuo¡ Sutuearu -ruJoJ ¡a8uo¡ts E sr eJJr{r asnefaq suorlsanb ueql sJaulutatap a,rtssassod

utootttylJ aqt ut Sututual a8an&ual puotag

194

Second language learning in the classroom

until valid and reliable tests of both implicit and explicit knowledge are used a larger number of studies (Ellis et al. 2009).

in

Similar

issues have been raised about research on corrective feedback but the central focus of this work has been on investigating whether certain types of corrective feedback are more effective than others. The results from Lystert study in French immersion programmes suggests that learners benefit more from feedback that pushes them to self-correct (i.e. prompts) than from feedback that provides the correct form (i.e. recasts). Research in other contexrs, however, has produced different results. For example, the majority oflaboratory studies ofcorrectiye feedback report benefits for recasts over other types of corrective feedback including prompts (Mackey and Goo 2007). These conficting findings are likely related to differences in conrext-the laboratory is a more controlled environment than the classroom, where there are competing demands on learners' attention. As a result, learners may notice certain rypes of feedback in the one-on-one laboratory interactions more than they do in the classroom in communicative or content-based classes, where the primary focus is on meaning.

As discussed in Chapter 5, the specific pedagogicalactiviq, in which corrective feedback is provided also plays an important role in terms of whether learners recognizeit as corrective feedback. The timing ofcorrective feedback may also be importantinL2learning. To date little research has explored whether it is preferable, for example, to provide feedback during or after communicative practice. One study of this issue was carried out by James Hunter (2012). He investigated the effectiveness of feedback that the teacher provided afier students had participated in student-led conversations. His findings show that such an approach can result in a higher proportion of repair than feedback provided in whole-class teacher-led activities. Recently there have been a number of meta-analyses of studies investigating the effectiveness of L2 corrective feedback on L2 oral production. The results are mixed, with some reporting benefits for recasts over other rypes of feedback (Li 2010) and others reporting advantages for prompts over recasts (Lyster and Saito 20 1 0). Until there is greater consensus on the contributions of different types of corrective feedback on L2learning, a prudent approach would be to provide learners with a variety of different rypes of correctiye feedback and to keep in mind the counterbalance hypothesis presented in Chapter 5, which suggests that more explicit corrective feedback may be effective in contexts where the learners' attention is focused on meaning/ conrent while implicit feedback may be sufficient to attract learners' attention in contexts where the focus of instruction is typically on language form.

s6r

feru s¡au.rea¡ 'stsecarSo ruJoj ar{l sa>lrt JoJJe uo llEqPJaJ ual{^\ 'aJoluJegun{ 'r¡ les or /(oq rou ',(es,,bqr tel{/'r uo l¡ernreu sI snJoJ (sluePnls aql 'uollf,t -Jalur FuonesJe uo uI uoll¿f,Iunrutuo3 (leJnleu, alelnuls ol srduane pue Surueaur sazseqdua ,lpr s,ta'L asnef,eg 'sJoJJe JIeIpJo allds ut f¡1n3ssa:rns alef,runluluof, ot Luaqt ,l\olle spunor8¡erq Sururee¡ pue aBrnSuEI Parer{s 'ruroJ uo sn)oJ ou sI aJeqrJI .sluepnls eJeI{,& sasself, uI anrt f¡ucadsa q slql aSrn8ue¡ perrclrslqdos pue etBJnJf,E eJour Suumbce uo ssa¡8o¡d.{\ols e>lelu leru s¡eu¡¿al teqr srvrol{s osle r{rJeesal eqr te,rarrrog 'a8en8ue¡ puoros E uI suoll -EsJe^uoJ e8euru ot ll¡lqe aqr put a:ualadruor a lleslunu¡luof, Pas¿aJf,ul ol p"el uEJ sanr^nf,B paled pur dnor8 uI suollf,¿Jalul IsuollesJeluof, uI a8r8ua ol sJauJeal JoJ salrlunrJoddg 'suJeJuoJ JEIItuls sasler ¡esodord ;pr s,re'I, eql 'uonf,nJlsurJo luauoduof,

E se seJnleeJ

aSen8ur¡ ol

uolluallr PaPFB

rsour ere sagreordde apnllur faqr uaqrtr Paseq-uolsuagardruo3 InJssamns .rndur a¡q¡suagardruoo ur Suturaru uo snro3 l¡duls sraurea¡ a8en8ue¡ Puof,as slsaqlodlq aqr ro3 r:oddns JIJlesrrJo arm 3>lBr IIy( uoluslnbre aSenSuel ]¿qr pug rou op a^{'saruu¡e¡8o¡d paseg-uorsuagardruoc uI uollf,nPold pue uots -uaqarduo: qtoq ur ssa¡8o¡d olqeJeplsuor e)pru sJauftal reqt ef,uePFa poo8 sr aJer{r elqrtys¡esodord (auo JoJ o^\t leg, Pue (PEeJ PUE "' uarsll rsn[, aqr Jo suoISJa^ eulaJlxe uorlsanb olul sllef sIqI 'uollf,nJlsut Pasnf,oJ -ruroJ ou ro alull re5o lttlt saurue¡8o¡d ul a8en8ue¡ ar{r Jo sarnpnJls f,IsEq lrp:glp aleq ol enunuof, sJauJBal lBql ef,uapr^e Sulsea¡cul sr aJer{I qrl¡^

'JBJ ool auo8 arreq leur uorln¡o,rar a^nr)runlutuof,, eqt 'aruepln8 Pu¿ suollrueldxa onsln8ullelsu PuB toJJa uo ¡l¿qpeal 'srsl¡eue elllsEJluof, tno 8uv'rorql ul 'PuEI{ rel{ro aqr ug ñualrg -o;d rraqt patlnbce e^sq sJeurEe¡ a8enSue¡ puof,es InJsssf,f,nsJo ólroleru agr frrvr aqr or puodsarror lou saop ,SutuurSaq aql uor3 rq8rr ll reD, reqr srsa8 -8ns aruap¡ra eqr rnq 'pasn eg 01 anulluof, IIII$ sei{leordde ¡tn8urlolPnt PuE uoDEISupJl JEuIIUEJD 'sesself, 3o sreal JaUe ue^a 'SuollesJa^uoc lreulpro ut aledlclu¿d or elqeun pue pelertsnry sreuJ¿el fueu a,tea¡ sPoqreu asaqr l¿ql tlf,rcaser pue aouauadxa puosrad uo5-,&\ou>l osle a,&t, t3 e \oH -s8ulpug .s;a>1eads JBenSue¡ puof,as luerf,go.rd l¡g8rq parnpord wq uorlrnrlsur ¡en8ull -orpne l1-repurS 'sesself, r{fns ur ecual¡adxa JreqlJo rno pado¡a,rep aSenSur¡ uSlaro3 e ut lcualcgord paeue,rpe asoq,/ú slrnPl^lPul lJru aA¿I{ snJo lsolu PUE poqraru pardde l¡aplzu, tsoru eqt rqnoP ou sI uoIlEIsuEJl JEIuurerS 'p¡:o,t erp Jo slool{3s el{r uI 'poqteru Sulgcrar el{r Jo ssa¡prr8ar Sulurea¡ a8en8ue¡ puofes ur Peaf,f,ns III^[ sJeurcal pag13 f¡euorrdacxs eruos reqr l!\oul a/N

'r{f,JeaseJ uooJSSEIJ ruo;3 rroddns lsou¡ aqt eAIef,sJ uoll -f,EJalur Pas"g-rualuo3 PuE o^Ileflunlutuof, uIqlIA\ luJoJ Ol Uolluarre apytord tEql saqf,eoJddy .pepuauruof,al eq rou um auo¡e Surusaru uo snsoJ a^lsnlf,xa uo snf,oJ ellsnlsxo lsolule u¿ Surluesa¡

rsotult

uE SultuasaJdar asoqr Jo uIJoJ

-dar qusodord reqr ruepl^e suraes

lI 'op ol >lJo^t l{f,nru llrls sI ererp q8noqrry

slesodord aqr tutssassy u¿ooJssqJ

atp ut Sututaal a7an8uq puotag

196

Second language learning

in the classroom

interpret it as a continuation of the conversation rather than focus on form. Thus, programmes based on the'Let's talk' approach are incomplete on their own, and learners' gains in confidence and conversational skills may not be matched by their development of more accurate and complex language.

It

is important to emphasize that the evidence to support a role for formfocused instruction and corrective feedback does not suggest a return to the 'Get it right from the beginning' approach. Research has shown that learners do benefit considerably from communicative interaction and instruction that is meaning-based. The results of research in French immersion, other content-based language teaching, and communicative ESL are strong indicators that learners develop higher levels of fluency through primarily meaning-based instrucdon than through rigidly grammar-based instruction. The problem is that certain aspects oflinguistic knowledge and performance are not fully developed in such programmes. Research investigating the 'Teach what is teachable' proposal is not yet at a point where it is possible to say to teachers: 'Here is a list of linguistic features and the order in which they will be acquired. You should teach them in this order'. The number of features that researchers have investigated in experi-

mental studies within this framework is far too small. On the other hand, there has been no strong evidence that teaching according to the developmental sequences is necessary or even desirable or that it will improve the long-term results in language learning. \Vhat is mostvaluable about this proposal is that it serves to help teachers set realistic expectations about the ways in which learners' interlanguage may change in response to instruction. The implications of 'Teach what is teachable' may be seen primarily in the fact that genuine progress in second language development must be measured in ways that include, but are not limited to, increased accvfacy in language production.

According to the 'Get it right in the end' proposal, classroom activities should be built primarily on creating opportunities for students to express and understand meaningful language. However, this proposal is based on the hypothesis that form-focused instruction and corrective feedback are also essential for learners' continued growth and development. The challenge is to find the balance between meaning-based and form-focused activities. The right balance is likely to be different according to the characteristics of the learners. The learners' age, metalinguistic sophistication, prior educational experiences, motivation, and goals, as well as the similariry of the target language to a language aheady known need to be taken into account when decisions are made about the amount and type of form focus to offer. Classroom data from a number of studies offer support for the view that form-focused instruction and corrective feedback provided within the context of communicative and content-based programmes are more effective

L6I

'suorlEluarJo

o.&\t

aseql uae^\taq ef,uEpq rseg

ar{l Pug or sr a8uallBr{J aql 'rar.F?u 'uonfnrtsur pasEg-SuruEeu puB pes¿q -ruJoJ uee ueg Jsooq) ol ÁBssa3eu tou sr lr tng 'SurrIJBar a8en8ue¡ puof,as ur uonoeJJof,-JoJJe pue tuJoJ ot uorlualte3o uoncelar atalduoc e ur palpseJ saurneuros srr{ spoqretu Sulgrear a8en8ue¡ a nelrunururof,Jo uorlrnpoJrur aql (aun erues eql lV'ruooJsselt aq] ur asn a8en8u¿l snoauetuods sapn¡rxa l¡enrrl,r leqt l¡rrnoce uo slseqdure uB sr eJerF eJar#\ slueuruoJr^ue ur >lJo \ IIIrs sJer{Jear lue¡¡ 'slxaluof leuonef,npe Jrar{t ul spua;l Suqle,rard agt tsurESE oB regr sacnce¡d ruooJsself, tno l¡t ol tprgrp aq uec lr 'aJoruJer{lJng (¿srqr rnoqe oB ol lez'l a nreJe lsow aql l¡uar s srr{l Jr Japuo,^a 1, ,les pur sacn -ce;d rer¡rueJ uroü >peq dars or ls¿a s&rrr¡e lou sr lI 'po8 rraqr gsr¡durorce 01 rseq^ror{JoesuesJEalf,Ea EqsJer{3eetIIeter{lasrf er{l ,{p.reqsrlr,luelxa auros ot ann aq feru slgr g8noqr¡y'acnce¡d uooJsself, tuaJJnf, Jrar{l ruJguof, uo peseq suonepueuruoral rer{r IaaJ &ru laqr pue ,snf,oJ aJE.l!\E eJE sJaqf,Eal lury,q

llduls

qf,reeseJ

Surutau¡ PuE snf,oj ruJoJ ef,uBlBg o] Peau aql Jo

lreululng 'looqls

lE

leea

e ro3 a8en8uel u8laroS e 8uúpnrs sluef,salope pue 'aBenBuEI

E

u.lur.o

sJnor{

^\eJ

rrer{} aru^\

PuE P"aJ touu?f, oqrtr sturrSluurr JaPIo pue ra8unol qloq 'ruauuoJr^ue e8en8ue¡ puof,as r ul Surlooqrs rrarp Suluur8aq uarpp{f, Sunof 'a8en8ue¡ qug Jo l{unoJ e Sururea¡ srsrn8ur¡ peureJl 'fts to3 arel¡do.ldd¿ eq ppo,/ü saqceordde tueJeglp

lunoJf,? olur

a>lEt

aun|

tsnlu snf,oj

'asJnor Jo 'sonsrJetf,EJer{f, Jeurcel ur sefuaJoJlp apl,ro.rd ol ,/Vt.orl Pue uagd\ lnogE suolsrf,acl

uroj

'a8en8ue¡ lnoqe suonsanb >1se 01 tueql Sur8e¡nocua lq pue 'lJeqpaaJ r{rl^\ Jeqro qcea apt,rord uec lagr qllqrYt ur slxaluof, Surdo¡a,rap fq 'saltr,rnoe alnef,runuruJof, ur esn laqr surroj ar{r or uonueDe Jraqr A\eJp ler{l seFr^rpe Sullea.rc lg ssacord aql ur r.red aler ol sJeuJeel a8e¡no¡ua ot InJesn eq osle u?J tI 'sruJo3 esar{rJo asn aql ur uonfnJtsul papln8 atuos epl^oJd pue sruap -nts Jrarp Jo ruaudo¡a,l,ap a8en8ur¡ puo3es aqt ur aSrarua ol Suruur8aq rsnl teql seJnlm3 a8en8ur¡3o eJE.lr\E aJoru a{uof,ag or lrr os¡e tq8nu sJer{ftal eJE

'a8en8ue¡ aqr ruog sragrp a8enSue¡ tsrg sraur¿el e ur aJntrnrls rEIn ra8rer -crurd E lnoqe uoneuJoJur e^nseJtuof, ap¡,rord ot aletrseq tou ppoqs ^\oq 'punorSlceq a8en8uel rsJU arues aqr aJer{s lagr uagm 3ur{eru ere ssEIf, a;ez're ,{¡elcadsa ag osp plnoqs

laql E

uI sJauJee¡;o lrrroleru aqt reqt sJoJJe Jo

sJeqJeaJ'uorluellB PasnloJ lnoqlra ef,nou ol lou u¡aas sJeuJEel lEql sJoJJe luatsrs¡ed lceJJof, ot arerrsaq rou ppor{s sJer{f,¿el 'elduJexe Joü 'sef,uels[unJJrJ ureuaf, ur >lleqpeeJ e nf,aJJof, pue uonfnJtsur pesnf,oJ-urJoJ'pepm8 apr,rord (p¡noqs pue) ueo srer{f,"el a8en8uel puof,es regr en8re ppo^\ e^t'snql 'euop Átetntte ro uo slseqdure e rsnlf,xa f¡enl.llzt e ol 'uolsuegerdruof, 'fruang Sullou¡o¡d ul parr{urT eJ" ler{t sarurue¡3o¡d ueqr Sulureal a8en8ue¡ puof,Js tuootssvlr aql ut Sututaal a&an&ual puocag

198

Second language learning in the classroom

Classroom-based research on second language learning and teaching has given us partial answers to many questions. Through continuing research and experience, researchers and teachers will fill in more details, always recognizing that no single answer will be adequate for all learning environments. Among the questions we will continue to ask are these:

. . . . . .

How can classroom instruction provide the right balance of meaningbased and form-focused instruction ? \Vhich features of language will respond best to form-focused instruction, and which will be acquired without explicit focus if learners have adequate access to the language?

\Vhich learners will respond well to metalinguistic information and which will require some other way of focusing amention on language form?

tülhen is it best to draw learners' attention to form-before, after, or during communicative practice? How should correctiye feedback on language form be offered? $lhen should learners be allowed to focus their attention on the content

oftheir utterances? Continued classroom-centred research, including the action research by teachers in their own classrooms, will provide further insights into these and other important issues in second language teaching and learning.

Questions for reflection

I

Keeping in mind that individual learner differences play an important role in second language learning, do you think a particular learner profile might be more compatible with one of the teaching proposals than another?

2 lf you were going to experiment with a new approach to teaching in your classroom,which of the six proposals described in this chapter would you choose?Why?

3

This chapter concludes with the suggestion that'Get it right in the end' is the best approach.ls this consistent with your own views?Why/why notl

66t

'uSrsep unlnf,rrrnf, or perelar sanssrJo a8ue.r ¡n; eql uo sarerogela 1oog srql pue 'seapr aql sJf,nportur (tO0O uoneN 'runlnf,rrrn: ¿ ua^e Jo 'sngel -¡ls e 'uossal EJo sruetuJle eql sE uaes aq osp lew spueJts JnoJ aqt 'Sulureay

,fie¡nqeco,r ur r{f,Jeasal suoneN uo paseg llpulSrrg 'Sururea¡ uoo.r -ss?lf, uo qf,rEasar qtrrtr alqlrrdruor sr tegr Surqcear a8en8uel or grrorddr paou¿pq e tuasa¡da.r laqr .raqraSo¡ 'ruaudo¡a,rep louang pue '8ulurra1 pasnroS-a8enSur¡'rndrno pasnroS-Surueaur'lndur pasncoS-Sulutaru :eJE spuerls rno3 aql 'auue¡8o¡d Surqceer a8en8ue¡ E ur-ef,uet;odul ¡enba Jo pue-lenuassa sE uees eJE ter{l (spueJts, rno3 pasodord srq uoneN InBd ' a8pa¡rn o¿ :>lJoÁ,r\aN urynrt¿tn) a&an&uaT'0I02 'rersl¡ere¡4¡'f pue U 'S 'I ruor¡ra¡ 'u&1saq

'arllre¡d pue l.roaqr uaa,r\tag epeul suonJauuoo InJasn Jqr ur tuapne sr Jaqf,Jeasal pue Jar{f,eet qroq se acuar¡adxa s Joglne aq1 d¡sno -auetlnurs tualuor pue a8rn8ue¡ Surrlcear 3o sa8ua¡pgf, er{l or suonnlos rq8nos s¿q reqr >1.rorrr prr.udrueJo sapef,ep sazrsaqruls rars/1 lo¿ 'epeue3 ur sau¡tue¡8o¡d uors¡aruur qf,uaJC uI r{f,Jeasal uo snroJ allsnlf,xJ lou rng lrerulrd E r{ll,4N 'sruooJSSEIr pe$q-ruaruoc ur Suru¡eal pue Surqcear a8en8ue¡3o slsfpue pue uoltdrnsep elrsuaqa¡duoc e saptzro;d looq srql g ugof rueple $trry' q r ? o.t ddV p a t uap q urun o) V t¡t a8anSuaT 3u! r/ na¿ pua SututaaT' L007,'¿'rars,(1 ' surur

: ruaruo

)

lua

q7n

:

o.r

'a¡rt¡e¡d u,e\o Jrar.ll ot uonEIaJ ul paruesard seapr aqr uo llegal ol sJap?eJ atelllour 01 slEIJatEIu 8ul¡cear pue 'seDrArtJE '$ls¿tJo esn e^rsuelxe sr aJaql pue suoneJePlsuof, ¡eolrce.rd ol Ief,rlaJoer{r tuo5 seloru rardeqc rpeg '8ulu;ee1 Sutssasse pue '8uruueld 's¡¡1s a8en8u€l aql Surdo¡a,rap 'tuatsls a8en8uel aqr Surqceal 'Suturua¡ pue Surqoea] roJ >lro \erue{ e :suoltres rnoJ orul papr,rlp sl r1 'sa8en8ue¡ Suru.real put Sulqcear eqt or ruE^alal s¡ldol 3o a8ue.r u8lerojTpuoras 3o 'JerPEar uooJssslf eqr JoJ >looq ef,ueJajal Injasn 3 sI sIqI aPr^\ e sJa^of

rI

'ssar¿

ólsra,rrun pJoJxO

:proJXO 'ruoo$sq) a8rnSuaT aqt ur SututaaT pua Sutqtaa¿'0002

'I'atpa¡¡

'l8o8epad a8en8uel roJ suonef,rldur slr pu¿ r.lf,reaser ar{r uee,&\tag ep¿ru are $luII '>loog eqr rnoq8norql 'plro.^a eql punoJe Sulqcear a8en8ue¡ Sune8nsa,rur aJE orlld sJorrfnpa pue sJEIoI{JS Jo >lro.{l, eqt seqsrlqnd gr¡qm 'quaasa¿ Su1cpaa¿ a&an&uaT purnol el{l jo Jolrpa sE puB Jar{fJEesal e se sa,uloads.rad ¡enp srq tuo5 >ls"l aqr sagreo;dde

srllg 'sarpnts Jo reqrunu tse^ E uro{ s8urpug eqr pue spoqraur al{r qroq slder^ar ag '3ulurea1 a8rnSue¡ puof,as ul Sulqcrat Jo aloJ aqr areS¡rsa,tur or l¡ecglrads pau8rsap sr terlr qf,reaseJ uo sasnf,oJ sITIg '.erunlo^ slqr uI -fallA, :Vntr '

'uapplA¡ 'l8o&apa¿

¡1a.r,u1ce¡g

aSan&uaT pua r1uaasa¿ &u1qna¿ aSan&ul7

'Zl0T,

'U'sIIg

tulpear rerlrrry roJ suorrsaSSn5 utoo¿ssplJ

aql m

&uru"taa1

a8un&uq puotag

per"rrrurJo tsrl e8r¿l E ezllBurelul uer{t erou op srauJtal a8en8ue¡ teqr aruaP -l,ta apnord srar.{lo fueur pue sa¡druexa asar¡1 'f.r8ue sI rulq or a>1ods 1 reqr ueur aql Jo 'ü,^ .ol orur peplJ log-aloc at¡¡, les oq^\ sJeuJBe¡ e8enSuel Puof,as r{rr^\ puE ',rq8¡r aprsdn tr pauJru I rnq u11\oP aPlsdn s3^\ lI, pur ',dols l,uec sl sIlL '$lro1y\ 1 pue dn Surcclq ur(I, s? r{Jns sarualues sueJpllql uI luaPl^e rualsls a8en8ue¡ eqt ,/$oq 3o Sulpuersrepun Suldo¡e,rap JIaI{I uo Paseg ere sarueluas aseql 'eroJaq pJraq aAEI{ lou p¡noc laqr leqt sef,ualuas ¡a,rou luru acnpo;d sreu;ra1 aSen8uel puoles pue lsJg esnmag 'uotlet¡rut q8norqr l¡ureur

peurrel a¡e saBenSuEI rtqr ruatunS.re el{l roJ r¡oddns pug or TFIUIP sI rI uoDellurl r¡tnorqrl¡uTPur Peureel eJ? setBnSwT I

qf,JBasal ruory Suru¡eaT :seepl re¡ndod eql uo tulrcaga¿ ¿s.ratdeqr Surparald aqt ur p€eJ arr.nol req,r,r {q PauJUuol -ro pe8ueqr uaaq uo¡t¡srnbre a8en8ue¡ puof,as uoqe s^ et^ Jnol e,re¡1 'r*ou a,rtB p¡noa,r no{ esoql pue uaqr a,re8 no¡( sasuodsa"l aqr a.reduo3'ute8e al¡euuo¡fanb aqt erc¡duor pue ¡req anurluof, nol a.rolag'SuluJeel a8en8ue¡ moq€ s€aPl *¡ndod oq elef,lPul ol nol Pe¡se a/v\'uolDnPoJlul aql ul

oBterdeqr stqt

euos qtfv\

Sutpea.r

paa.r8e

nol l¡8uo.rrs

^

suo¡u¡do JnoÁ rv\al^eu

^ll^llf,v

'suoluldo .re¡ndod asaqr tnoqe s \aIA u^\o JnoJo auos Sulreqs'>looq snp ut PessnfslP JAEq a,tt regr Áoarp pue I{fJEasaJ perEIoJ al{t Jo eu¡os ezlJeuruns PUE uorlfnPoJlul aqr ur ol papuodsat nol regr sluauralrts B I 3I{r ol uJnleJ ar'r tarderp slql uI

/$.eIAaJd

CIflIISIAflU CNINUVfl-I flDVNDNV-I

INOSV SVflCII UVfNdOd

202

Popular ideas about language learning reuisited

and memorized sentences. They also identify patterns in the language and extend them to new contexts.

Ifwe

definition of imitation (the immediate repetition of all or part of another speakert utterance) we find that some children imitate a great deal as they acquire their first language. Even these children, however, do not imitate everything they hear. Instead, they selectively imitate certain words or structures that they are in the process of learning. Furthermore, children who do little overt imitation learn language as quickly and as well as those who imitate more. Thus, this rype of imitation may be an individual learning strategy but it is not a universal characteristic oflanguage learners. use a narrow

Some second language learners also find it useful to imitate samples of the new language. Classroom researchers have observed students who repeat what they

hear others sa¡ and some advanced learners who are determined to improve their pronunciation find it helpful to spend time carefully listening to and imitating language in a language laboratory or tutorial. However, for beginning learners, the imitation and rote memorization that characterizes audiolingual approaches to language teaching is not effective if learners do not also use the sentences and phrases they are practicing in meaningful interaction. Learners need to do more than recite bits of accurate language in drills and dialogues.

Nevertheless, recent findings from corpus linguistics have provided a new appreciation for formulaic language use. \7e know from the discussion of usage-based theories discussed in Chapter 4 that a great deal of natural language use is predictable on the basis of the frequency with which words or phrases occur together. Learners create strong associations between language features that tend to occur together. Thus, language is partlylearned in chunks larger than single words. However, this internalization of the input does not depend on the learner's imitation of all or part of another persont utterance in a rote-repetition fashion. it is the combined exposure to language features in the input and their use in meaningful exchanges that leads to learning.

2

Parents usually correct young children when they make grammatical errors There is considerable variation in the extent to which parents correct their childrent speech. The variation is based partly on the childrens age and partly on the parents' social, linguistic, and educational background. \Mhen children are very young, parents rarely comment on grammatical errors, although they may correct lapses in politeness or the choice of a word that doesnt make sense. As children reach school age, parents may correct the kinds of non-standard speech that they hope their children will outgrow, for example, 'Me and Fred are going outside now'. Extensive observations of parents and children show that, as a rule, parents tend to focus on meaning rather than form when they correct children's

e0z

Sururea¡ ol alo ep uef JauJEal aql erun qJnru .^aor{ '8uru.rea1 ro3 saruara3ard pue sa¡lrs (sJauJeal lenpr^rpur qtr.&\ stf,EJalur uonf,nJtsur aqt ,ta.oq .apntnde 8ulu.real a8en8uel sE r{rns sef,ueraJlp lenpr^rpur raqlo Jo ro a8e qtr^! aruoo rer¡r sa8ueqf, Jo uonJagal e eq leu tJ 'uJeal ol petplrloru lou aJE sJauJeal a8enSue¡ puof,es rppe ler{l ef,uep4e sB ue>pt eq rou ppoqs srgl'uonrsrnbce aSen8ue¡ lsJg ur op uarplrql terp lrrrnooe pur louang eqr e^arqle ,(1arct srppe se a8en8uel puofes r Sururea¡ ur8aq oqlr sJruJerl reqr .alduexa ro3 ru.ou1 a¿¡'8ururea1 a8en8ue¡ ur sa8ua¡eqc rearS :atunof, u) sJauJ"al palE^notu fn8ry ua^e'sarunaruog lpr8rr oor slqt rardJatur tou tsnru a./\4.lng 'tuop oq./( asoqt uerll lauag op o] puar uJeel ol lue.&\ oq,^a sJeuJeol teqt searSe auol;a,rg

uope no(u sr uoplslnbre e8en8ue¡ puoras ul ssef,rnsJo ronlpard rseq ar{l 7 'luouJuoJrlua Suru.rea¡ agr or Surrq stuapnts leql senrlrge luoJeJrp Jrlt a8e8ua ol slezvr pug ot sl pnuessa sr rErLA'a8en8uel puofas e Suru;ea1 lnoqe efroqJ ou al¿r{ sdno¡3 ór¡ounu ¡o tue¡8nuu¡l ruog sluapn}s (stxatuof, leuone3npe .{ueru u1 'paaDns or llllqe rrrueprlr ar{r e^Eq lou op laqr trqr spuno.r8 agr uo a8en8uel Jer{toue ur?al ol sauunl¡oddo ruory pepnlf,xa aq rou ppoqs stuepnrs 'stsat|1 lq parnseau lou are reqt sanrlrgt put sllDls tuaragrp lueur sello ur Sururea¡ a8en8ur¡ ]Erp pellerer eg lsnru U 'lueuodtul tsotr { teat? e

'a8paproul clrsln8urpraru u¿ql Jer{tEJ sllpls uorlef,runururo: 'sJeureal a8enSuel IEro uo sl srsegdua aqtJr anrl l¡ercadsa q qql InJssalf,ns og urf sanrTrgt Fnlfellalu jo lral;r,L apr,r\ E r{¡r1'r sJeuJEel teqt u,r\oqs srr{ r{JJ¿esaJ 'pezlsegdua sr asn e8en8uel e nf,EJetur aJeq,4a sruooJSSEIJ ur pue s8untas Sulurea¡ a8enSuel IEJnlEu ur '.ra,rarvro11 'lle^\ sE stsauo spur¡ Jaqro uo op leru stsarbI ,ro ile \ op oqm aldoa¿ '(sa¡nr ¡eruru¿¡3 'a¡druexa ro3) Ila,ry\ e8en8uel agtryoqaBuruJEel uo sl srseqdrua aql aJeq,4 sruooJss€ll ur ssaf,fnsJo

rorrpard

pooS e ueuo sr stsar|1fq parnseeu sr teqt a:ua8r¡1arur;o pur>t

eql

sreurual a8en8ue¡ poo8 eru aydoadluaSrqaturtq8g g 'sreel ro3 sruJoJ IeJneruu¡r¡8un urElJJJ Sursn ul tsrs¡ad leru sraurra¡ a8en8url puo)as 'aruep¡n8 put >llBqpaal elnf,arrof, lnoqlr^\ 'regr srsaSSns efuaprle aql 'putq Jeqlo eqr uO 'JoJJe uo >lfeqpaa; Jo uonf,nJlsu FruJoJ lue rnoqrlr't aSrn8ue¡ 3o ¡eap rea-r8 e a¡lnboe uEf, srlnpe pu¿ uarpllql qroq 'pu"r{ auo ar{r uO 'xa¡duor aJour sr sJauJ¿al a8en8ue¡ puoles JoJ asrf ar{I

ptqpaal rrcrldxa ou ro eprll r¡u.r aSenBuEI ar{lJo ruroJ tlnpe aqr armbcr or alqe ag or ;eadde leqr 'flareunuo¿ 'aBenBuEI rrer{r jo (surar -ted uolleuotur aql 'sauaqdrotu pc¡reuruer8 aqr tapJo prom aqr) aJnlonJls Jrseq aqt uJeal ol JapJo ur 1reqpaal e^nf,eJJof, lualsrsuor uo puadap louu?f, uaJPIrI{f, IEI{] sI sn sller slql IEILA 'uoll?f,IunuluJof, tllur\ aJeJJeluI rou oP ler{l sJoJJe ol tJEeJ ueuo lou op laqr tng 'í>lJrtueJ epnJ E Jo 'slf,EJ ar{lJo ruaru -ot¿ls loeJJof,ur u¿ 'e3roqf, pJolv\ lfeJJoour uE lf,eJJof feu feqr 'sng1 'graads paunnatSutu"taal a8an&uq tnoq? saap wlndo¿

204

Popular ideas about language learning reuisited the new language, and what opportunities the learner has to use the language outside the classroom. Teachers have no influence over learners' intrinsic motivation for learning a second language. Students come to classrooms from different backgrounds and life experiences, all of which have contributed to their motivation to learn and their attitudes toward the target language and the communitywith which it is associated. The principal way that teachers can influence learners' motivation is by making the classroom a supportive environment in which students are stimulated, engaged in activities that are appropriate to their age,

interests, and cultural backgrounds, and, most importantl¡ where students can experience success. This in turn can contribute to positive motivation, leading to sdll greater success.

5

The earlier a second language is introduced in school programmes, the greater the likelihood of success in learning The decision aboutwhen to introduce second or foreign language instruction must depend on the objectives of the language programme in the particular social context of the school. tWhen the objective is native-like performance in the second language, then it may be desirable to begin exposure to the language as early as possible, as long as learners have extensive exposure to and opportunities to use the second language in a variety of contexts. The research evidence is fairly strong that those who begin second language learning at an early age are most likely to eventually be indistinguishable from native speakers. cases where native-like proficiency is targeted, it is important to recognize certain disadvantages ofan early start for second language learning. 'ülhen an early start means that children have little opportunity to conrinue to develop their first language, the resulting subtractive bilingual-

However, even in

ism may have lasting negative consequences. For children from minoriry-language backgrounds, programmes promoting the development of the first language both at home and at school may be more important for long-term success in the second language than an early start in the second language itself. Research shows that a good foundation in the child's first language, including the development of literacy, is a sound base to build on. Children who can begin their schooling in a language they already knowwill have more self-confidence, will be able to learn more efFectively in the early school years, and will not lose valuable time in a period of limbo during which they struggle just to understand what is happening in the classroom. For many children, there is no opportuniry to have their early schooling in their first language. They are members of small minority groups where it is not practical for schools to offer them an educational Programme in their

902

'luaJeJIP ag tsnlu sa8en8ue¡ aqt regr 'lpcarroour sauJrleruos 'etunsse leqr esnerJg sJItIJelIuJIsJo a8elue,l,pe e>pr or 3u¡¡¡e3 'Surreulrul¡csp l¡ra,r.o eg uEf, sJeuJEa'I 'tuaqt or rno

parurod are laqr sselun senrJelrruls Jo a8etue,r.pe e>lel 01 alqt aq sler't¡e tou

leru s¡eu¡eal 'rl¿J uI 'seruetues a8enSuel-rsrg orur spJo^\ aSen8ue¡-puoras Sunrnd3o ssa¡o¡d e flduls tou sr Suru¡ea¡ a8en8uel puoles 'JEIIIuls aJE rel{l lr¡nrgrp aroul qtl^\ Jo ralel parrnbce ag l¡;essarau tou stoadse esoqr ueqr

fipr a8en8uel tsr5

er.p

ruo5 ruara5lp are rrr{] a8en8ue¡ puof,as aqr3o sreadry

'sJoJJe arues er{t e>leru oq.& sJauJeel Jer{}o qrl.{\ toeluof, ur l¡ruanba.rS

l¡ercadsa 'aruol¡a^o or rlnf,srp aq

aJ¿ sJauJ¿JI uagru.

ltru larp

'sa8en8ue¡

puofas pu" rsJg er{r uae \rag ll.re1¡ru¡s ¡errred aruosJo uolldac¡ad (sJeuJral ,{q pasnec aJE sJoJJa uaq/tya8enSuel JauJEal uI sJoJJaJo sofJnos roleru arp3o auo sl a8¿nBuEI a nEU arp ruo5 suraned3o reJsuBrr aqr 'pueq raqro aqr uO 'xerufsSo sa¡drcurrd f,rseg eulos sE IIe,^ se 'sprorrL aleuSo¡ 'raqeqd¡e aqr Sulpn¡rur-Aou1 fpearp sreureal rEI{r qrnu sI arrqt '(qruarg pue qsrurdg 'ueruJag pue qsrÉuE 'a¡duexa ro3) sursnor aso¡r fla,rrreler are sa8en8ue¡ aqr 'Sururea¡ a8en8url u8ra.ro3 ro puoresJo sr¡adse lueu ol llar'nlsod alnqlrl

31

-uof, uer sa8rn8uq eJour Jo euoJo a8pay'rou1 teqt azuSooal plnoqs e^\'tsJld

aSenSuey

tsrg rlar{r ruory ef,uaraJratq ol anp ]eql sa)Plsru¡ eqlJo lsotr\l 9

ar¿ eTE(u sreurEel aSunSue¡ Puores

'srql rnoge rg8rr uago are laqr (¡peg 'ssarSord qcnur 8ur>lrru lnoqlunr ,s.real.roj, Sullpnrs uaeg a^¿q ot sPeal uar3o gceordde ,peai-dl.rp, sltl¡ laqr srauffal sE reqr 'uollensn{ IeeJ 'sra>¡eads a8en8ue¡ puof,as parup p? arnpord tou III^\-srea,( rg8ra ro uelas JoJ us^a->lae,&\ E sJnor{ o1v\l Jo aug 'a8en8uEl Puof,as E uJEel ol se>lEl lI 8uo¡ ,noq Jo ser?urlsa rnsllear uo paseg eq ppor{s saruu¿¡8o¡d Iooqts ¡¡V 'e8rn8ue¡ ¡ eu eqt or a¡nsodxa e^Isualul eJoruJo porrad E sePnloul esJno3 a8en8uel u8ra.roS agr3l anrr l¡¡etcadsa sl slql 'uollrnrtsulJo >lea./'r ¿ sJnol{ /(eJ e l¡uo Sulrago sau¡rur¡8o¡d ul (plo srca,t ¿-9 te 'a¡druexa ro3) rar¡rea ur8aq or{,&\ esoq} qrrr'r fpprnb dn qum or olqe are (sp¡o-rea,(-g 1 'a¡druexa -ro3) uarp Tr{J raplo 'rare¡ Sulq:ear a8en8ue¡ puoras uÉaq or luel)Ue erou aq uEf, tI 'a8rn8ue¡ rs.rg s,ppll ar¡r Suldola.tap pue Sulureluleu¡ ot luaut¡uuor 8uo¡ts B sr aJar{l eJar{^\ pue 'sruepnls IIe JoJ IIHS elltef,Iuntutuof, JISEq sl aurur¡8o¡d Ipuonmnpe aqr 3o po8 aqr uaqr6 'tuaJaJIP atmb st uollsnlls aql 'sluePnls ¡e lg aoueuroS.rad a>lll-a^Irru tou s pata8Jet sI t¿ql fcuarogo.rd 30 la^el eql eJaql( uonJnJtsul a8en8ut¡ puof,es JoJ ro uollf,nJlsul a8en8ue¡ u8ra.ro3 rog

'uoJa pue erun salet Suturta¡ a8en8utl puores reqr PuelsJaPun oI{^\ Pu¿ 'a8en8uq etuoq aql urclurtru ot stua¡¿d a8e¡norua oqn lrpeglP s,uaiPllql erp rradsar oq \ sJolBf,npa a^Itlsuas oAEII ot IEIJnJf, sI 1I 'uaJPIIqJ esel{r JoC 'puno.r$loeq rrer{iJo ssa¡pre8ar (uarpllqf, II¿ roJ uoltef,nPaJo a8rn8ue¡ a¡8urs e pJrepueru seq uonelst8el araq.{

suollrlpslrnl ur ertl¡ fagr .ro 'e8en8ur¡ rsry

patTslaat Bututaal aSan&uq ffioqu s?apt

nlndo¿

206

Popular ideas about language learning reuisited

However, the first language is not the only infuence on second language learning. Learners from different backgrounds often make the same kinds of errors, and some of these errors are remarkably similar to those made by first

In such cases, secondJanguage errors are evidence ofthe learners' efforts to discover the structure ofthe target language itselfrather language learners.

than attempts to transfer patterns from their first language.

7 the bestwayto

learn newvocabularyis through reading This statement is true but it does not tell the whole story. Children expand their vocabulary dramatically during their school years, and reading is the major source of this growth. Second language learners can also increase their vocabulary knowledge through reading, but few second language learners will read the amount oftarget language text that a child reads in the course of more than a decade of schooling. Research evidence suggests that second language learners benefit from oppor-

tunities to read material that is interesting and important to them. However, those who also receive guidance from instruction and develop good strategies for learning and remembering words will benefit more than those who simply focus on getting the main ideas from a text. \What is perhaps most striking in the research is the evidence that in order to successfully guess the meanings of new words in a text, a reader usually needs to know more than 90 per cent of the words in that text.

8 It is essential for learners

to be able to pronounce att the indiüdual sounds in the second language

Research on pronunciation has shown that second language speakers'

abiliry

to make themselves understood depends more on their abiliry to reproduce the phrasing and stress patterns-the 'melody' of the language-than on their abiliry to articulate each individual sound. Another important emphasis in current research is the undeniable fact that most languages of the world are spoken in many different varieties. Thus, it no longer seems appropriate to insist that learners be taught only one language variery or that only native speakers ofa particular variety are the best teachers. Rather, learners need to learn to understand and produce language varieties that will permit them to engage in communicative interaction with the interlocutors they are most likely to encounter.

9

Once learners know 1,000 words and the basic structure of a second language, they can easily participate in conversations with native speakers It is true that most conversational language involves only a relatively limited number of words and sentence types. However, learners will find it easier to

LOZ

qseads rrar{r .úrporu ot sltnSurlrg lueng pur sra>lrads a nru Jo suoge eqr ruo5 rgauag sraurre¡ aSenSue¡ puoras rer{r rqnop ou sr aJar.{t 'etun Jrues ar{l lV

'saJnlmJ xa¡druo:, ol .a1drurs,3o arnoerd pue 'Suuapro'uoltetuesaJd pare¡osl aql sallolur srqr uaqr* l¡re¡ncltrtd-,a¡drurs, ag ol sruJal rnsln8ull ur pe^ref, -¡ad a¡e ler{l saJnlf,n¡ls ol a¡nsodxe (sJauJeel lJrJlsal ot alqeJrsap Jou,(ressacau Jer{rleu sr 1r ler{l srsaSSns srql 'sJar{ro eJoJoq parrnbre aJE saJnlf,nJls urElJJf, 'sraurea¡ or paruasa.rd sl a8en8ue¡./v\or{ Janeu ou reqr u.{\or{s srr{ rlf,Jeese¿

sauo xaldruoc aroJaq

ssrnlruls atentue¡ eldturs rlrsal pForls srerl]eal II

'rsEI eqr eroJeq 3uo1 uano8ro3 ueag a^Er{ IIr{\ lrun rsJg arp ur peur¿al sernteal a8en8ue¡ aql 'tueqt Sulsn pue

'Suleas 'Surreaq enunuof ol senrunuoddo rnor¡rvrn'rer{t lla>lll osle sr lI 'esn a8en8ue¡ puJou ur lseJluof, pue aledruoo seJnteal a8en8url tueJegrp ^/\or{ sJeuftel aprnord lou saop auln ? lB eJnlf,nJrs Ja^of,srp or lr¡unrroddo ue grml 'rqSner l¡snol,rard sauo eql auo Jo a¡lroe¡d pu¿ uorl?luasard pare¡osl asnre.ld ol sJauJeal JoJ saurunlJoddo ere.r lluo qll^\'aJnrEeJ rxau eql uo e oru ueql pue 'sllun luanbesqns IEJa es ur lr ef,JoJureJ pue rlun rsJg eql ur aJnlea3 a8rn8ue¡ re¡nrued E a3nporlur teqt qoogrxatJo uonezlue8ro aqr ur uaas aq srr{I'salnJJo uollelnrunlf,¿ uE sr ruaudola,Lap a8en8ue¡ puof,Js reql uoF -drunsse aslej ar{r uo p:szq are Sulqcrat or saq:eo.rdde poseq-ernlJnns atuos

s¡ll

uEf,

'rg sacald eqr

IIE

lllun SuunpnrlsaJ

pue Surrsnlpea¡ 'a8en8uelJatur Sunslxa ue orul su;aned pue suroS a8en8 -uel ^/y\eu Surter8arur 30 sassaco¡d se lo^ur 1r 'Jerpsu 'JarpouE JauE alnJ auo Sulppe lsnf lou sr ruaurdo¡a,tap a8en8url 'owlr retel e tB (¿lBI{t qrrm Sulop ar,nof l¿Llrtr, alll suorrsanb acnpord uaqr pue .¿qs1¡8uE u aqto"td,(es no.{ op A¡\oH, Jo ,¿l¿ql s(l¿r.LA,

SB

r{3ns suollsanb sIBInLuJOJ lf,eJJOf, ¡se

feur sJauJeal

rvroq 'e¡duexa JoJ '1$.es a¿¡'a8en8uelJelur Jreqt otur a8rn8ue¡ aqr rnog¿ uoll -EruJoJur ¡ttau 8u¡le¡od¡ocul aJE sJeuJeal fegl rtrogs leru ¡f a8efs le lce¡nc¡e ur

aurlrep aq¿'z a8zrg re ure8e f¡are;nf,f,? rr ef,npord pue '/a8erg re (r1 rduaut faqr uaqlt srorra a{Eru .lo) u.ro3 ar¡r a:npord or IIeJ '(uro3 rBI{r paureal a,,teq faqr rrqr SurrsaSSns) x a8erg re l¡atrrncce LuroJ Jelnf,n¡ed e esn leu¡ sJeuJEa'I 'tuaudo¡a,rap srl uI reaur¡ fldruls lou sI Sulu.rea¡ a8en8uel puoles

Jeqloue ol uo 3uro3 eJoJeq euo IPEa aslpsJd Plnoqs sreureel puB rarup B lE euo se[nr ImIrEIrIurpJS tueseJd Plnoqs sretlrEel 0I 'tJeJJor aJE saJnlf,nJrs ef,ueruas aqr pu" spJol\ eql uaq.{! ue^a 's8ulpuers;apun -srur Jo u^\oP>leaJq uortef,runuruJof ot PEal sarulleruos suollf,EJarul3o sadlr asaql ul sef,uaJaglp leJnrlnf, ag1 'stsanbeJ a>IEIu ro 'azt8o¡ode 'lcedsat r*oqs s;opads,/rrorl sE s8ulqr r{Jns uo uonualle Jlerp snooJ ot uaqr JoJ Injesn sI rI 'a¡durexa rog 'a8en8ue¡ rvrau aqrJo sernleeJ f,Ileru8rrd aqr3o auoslo Surpuers -rapun ue eler.l os¡r faqr 3l poorsJapun sa^lasueql aleru ot pue puersJopun patTs1rtat SuTutaal aSunSuq

moq? raapx wlndo¿

208

Popukr

ideas about knguage learningreuisited

to help them understand. The language used in modified interaction may contain avariety of linguistic structures, some 'simple' and some 'complex'. However, it also includes a range of adjustments that enable second language learners to engage in interactions with native and more advanced speakers of the second language more easily-more repetition, slower rate ofdeliver¡ paraphrasing, etc. Teachers must also be aware, however, that some linguistic forms are so rare in classroom language that learners have little opportunity to hear, use, and learn them if the teacher does not make a point of providing them. These are not necessarily difficult or complex forms. As we saw in Chapter 6, some 'simple' language forms turn out to be extremely rare in classroom language, even in content-based instruction.

12 Learners' effors should

be corrected as soon as they are made

in order to prevent the formation of bad habits Errors are a natural part oflanguage learning. This is true ofthe development of a child's first language as well as of second language learning by children and adults. Errors refect the patterns of learners' developing interlanguage systems-showing gaps in their knowledge, overgeneralization of a second language rule, or an inappropriate transfer ofa first language pattern to the second language. Teachers have a responsibiliry to help learners do their best, and this includes

the provision of explicit, form-focused instruction and feedback on error.

-When

errors are persistent, especially when they are shared by almost all students in a class, it is important to bring the problem to their attention. This does not mean that learners should be expected to adopt the correct form

or pattern immediately or consistently. If the error refects a developmental stage, the instruction or feedback may be useful only when the learner is ready for it. It may be necessary to repeat feedback on the same error many times.

Of course, excessive feedback on error can have a negative effect on motivation; teachers need to be sensitive to their students' reactions to correction. The amount and rype of correction that is offered will also vary according to the specific characteristics of the students, as well as their relationship with the teacher and with each other. Children and adults with little education in their first language will not benefit greatly from sophisticated metalinguistic explanations, but university students who are advanced learners of the language may find such explanations of great value. Immediate reaction to errors in an oral communication setting may embarrass some students and discourage them from speaking while others welcome such correction as exacdy what is needed to help them notice a persistent error at just the moment when it occurs.

607,

esoql lseJJol or dlaq PIno^! IEI{] uoIlEluJoJuI I{rI^{ Jal{lo qf,Ee oPI^oJd lluEu (s,/v\orls osp I{fJEasaJ aql -lPJo louuEf sla^al JEIItuls le srauJEal IEI{I te^a,&\oq 'sJo>ltads eln¿u ot Jo slalel pefue^pe eJoul tE sJeuJeal ot Suqeads ueq.^a oP faqr ueqr lcuarcgordSo slercl rellruls tB sleureel or 8uq¡er uarl.Lr qcaads rlaqr ur sJorJa a.¡oru fue acnpord rou op sJeuJeel r¿qr u^\oqs seq qcreasar 'f¡3ur -sr¡d¡ns teq^eauos 'plnof Ja^a ssEIJ paJruaf,-Jaqf,¿al E uetlt suollesJaluor uI Surr¿dlrrr¡ed pur 3ur¡eads ul acltce¡d eJour JEJ sapr.tord >1ro¡vr dno.l8 pue rred 'peqrleru llarelrdorddr are sreuJtel pue pau8rsap IIa¡a eJE satrl^Irre al{l JI 'pau8rsap,(1rado.rd ere Dlsel agr

jr l¡ercadsa

'saBelue^PESIP

aqt q8la.,r,rrno rEJ >lro,4^ dno¡3 pur rredSo stgaueq eqt 'sselel{ue^eN 'sauo e>lII -ra8¡el aJour qll^\ su.ralted a8en8ue¡;arul JIaIF are¡dar ol ruaql pee¡ iq8nu rugt Sulueeu .to; uottetto8eu JoJ paau aqt Sutreutrulla 'lle¡a lra.t raqto qrra puelsJapun or f1a>1r1 are laqr 'fcuarcgordjo le^al aru¿s eql l¡q8nor lB are PuE puno.rS¡ceq a8enSue¡ lsJU erues erlt uJoU au¡oJ sJauJeal uer{,44'aJouJJI{unC

'rndul rf,aJJoful aruos apIAoJd feru faqr 'raqro I{)Ea qll&\ lferelul sJauJeel 'sJauJeel Jer{ro qtvrrBunce¡alul a¡e.{aql ueq,&\ (u¡aoP lnqs, lou aJe uaq.Lr 'sng1 IBI{I sassaf,o;d a¡lrtuSoc ag1 'ruarudole^eP rndur uor3 uJral ot tuJr{r ^\olle tndul se selJes PeaJ PuE reaq sraureal reqr aBenBuEI aql a8en8ue¡ Jleql ot

q

sa{p}sFu s(retllo rlrEe fdo) faql '(sannrlr? rred ¡o dno¡8 (aldurpxe roJ) f¡aer¡ ]J?relur ol Pe ^.o[P ere sraureal uarl4N 7I 'PaJelsBLu

lou

a,req

lar¡r

seJntfnJls pue sruJo3 3o &arre,r lea¡8 e or pasodxa are flurcuac suooJSSEIf, aprslno a8en8ue¡ puof,Js e a¡lnbce l¡nlssarrns oq1ü sJeuJ?el rEI{r JaquJuaJ ppoqs a/N dpueururopard ua,ra ro l¡a.trsn¡oxa slBlJelsru qf,ns asn 01 sluaP -nls ot af,r^iasslp E Jq plno^\ rI rng 'lsea tuaas s8ulrp JaIFo eJal{.,ur lxeluof, e ur luaruela euo etplosl terp splJat¿ru sn)oJ-.^aoJJeu asn ol alel¡do¡dde sl

r¡ 'uralqord lualsls¡ad e Jo uollfaJJof, JoJ Peeu 3 sI eJer{l slaeJ JeI{f,EJr el{r uaq,4 Jo 'erurl tsJg eqr JoJ Paf,nPoJrul sI eJntEaJ a8enSue¡;e¡ncltrrd ¿ ual{lN 'fcuapuadep JIeI{r sPueua a8en8 -uel arp o1 a¡nsodxa dars-lq-dars or stuapnts Sullf,Irtsad fpuapuadapul ueql pue aou"prn8 s.ragceat aql rpr.^¿\ rsJg slqr op laql 'ruoorsself, el{l ePISrno esn a8en8ue¡ ,ro3 pareda;d aq or Suro8 l¡enrua,ra are lagl3l IelJeleru ,Jllueqlne, qrrm Sulpap ro3 salSate;ts do¡e,up ot PJau osp sluaPnlS 'pa8ua¡eqo

ro

lf,EqPaal aAIlf,eJJof, sE Pa^Iaf,Jad a¡e slsrlaJ

patTs1rtat 3u7ur.aa1 aSan&uq

ffi oq? wap wlndo¿

2t2

Popular ideas about knguage learning reuisited

and task-based instruction start from the principle that we learn language by using it to achieve a goal, for example, understanding a stor¡ making a medical appointment, writing a science report, or joining the fun on the playground. \lith this in mind, classroom activities are designed to prepare students to continue learning outside the classroom, by giving them experience in language uses that are like those they will encounter there. As we saw

in Chapter 6, some theorists argue that second language instruction

can only lead to knowledge aboutlanguage (explicit knowledge) and question whether instruction can lead to the ability to use the language spontaneously and fluently (implicit knowledge) in a wide range of communicative contexts. Contemporary approaches to L2 instruction target the development of both rypes of L2 abiliry by ensuring that students use the language in meaningful interaction inside the classroom and that they learn effective strategies for using the language outside the classroom when they have opportunities to do so.

AcTlvlTY

Support your op¡n¡on

Choose two or three of the'popular ideas' that you find especially important. For each of these, identify and discuss how one or more of the research studies you have read about in this book has strengthened your agreement/ disagreement with the statement or has led you to change your views.

Conclusion Knowing more about second language acquisition research will not tell you what to do in your classroom tomorrow morning. tü/e hope, however, that this book has provided you with information that encourages you to refect on your experience in teaching.'We hope, in addition, that this refection will contribute to a better understanding ofyour responsibilities as a teacher and your students' abilities and responsibilities as language learners. As we have seen, language learning is aflected by many factors. Among these are the personal characteristics and experiences ofthe learner, the social and cultural environment both inside and outside the classroom, the structure of the native and target languages, opportunities for interaction with speakers

of the target language, and access to corrective feedback and form-focused instruction. It is clear that teachers do not have control over all these factors. Nevertheless, a better understanding of them will permit teachers and learners to make the most of the time they spend together in the twin processes of teaching and learning a second language.

Jrer{t ur JEaq laqr a8en8ue¡ aqr readar PuE etetlrur sJauJeal uaq,^ '^\eI^ slql or Surpromy'stIqEI{Jo tuaruqsllgersa aqr q8norgr are¡d salet 'pgre,r-uou Jo IEqTJA rar{ral{^\ 'Sururea¡ IIE tBql f.roaqr ¡ror8o¡ogclsd

y

:rusrrnol,ruqeq

¡tutulu aldruexa llllqe aql :uoneu¡ru¡rtsrp Lror¡pnu

'daar1s¡drqs se qf,ns srrcd

roJ 'spunos aSen8uel qsm8utrsrp ot

'asn pSSulueauJo slxJluoo tuou PUP Jeqro l{ree ruog uonelosr ul su¡artrd af,uetuesJo uoltrzlJoruaru PuE'acrl¡e¡d'uolltlada¡ aqr q8norqr srlq"r{Jo uolteruroJ aqr sazrseqdua qceotdde leuoll3nrlsul srql 'srseqtodfq srsl¡eut e^IlseJtuor agr l¡eroadsa 'srrlsln8url lrJnlf,nJls uo pue Sulureal3o lroaqt lslrnolleqoq aqt uo Pes?g sr reqr Sulrpear e8tn8ue¡ u8ta.ro3 ro puoras or qceorddr uy :r¡cuorddu ¡un8u¡o¡pnra

fpoq pue spu"q aql3o suonou q8norqr

passa.rdxa

¡e ,fuelnqrcol qf,u E pue aJntJnJtsJo salnJ xaldruoc qutr'aBenBuEI anJl e sI rI JEaP aJE or{ l sJeqlo qll,^a lf,eJalul oq.^a JoJEaP aJE ol{-/v\ suef,IJellrv qlJoN eql :(-ISV) a8unEuel ut¡5 uec¡reury luetu lq pasn a8en8uel ¡e.rnrsa8

'tsrg aqr Sulso¡ rnoqrv'r a8en8uel puocas uarsr¡

e

Sutueal

:rus¡¡en8u¡¡Iq a pIPPlt

'sasuodsa¡ rlaqt lq uotsuaga;druof JIeIp ¡aotls oslr lnq f¡uo rou sluapnts qJIq^\ ut anbtuqcar Sulgeear y :8urua¡srl e ptle

'luaruuoJrlua Surgrear u./(o Jlar{l or lglfáds PuB Ielol a¡¿ suorlsanb pue s¡eo8 qJJEesaJ aql 'sJaqtear Jal{ro qtl^\ uoIlEJoqEIIos ul Jo suJooJss?lf u,!\o Jlaql uI uauo 'sJatloeal lq lno PeIJJEf, r{JJEaseU :qJJBasaJ uollf,u 'eruanbes ptuarudo¡a,reP B or rua¡e,rmba sr JePJo

f¡e.rn:o¿ ur ler{l paJJaJuI a^EI{ sJaI{lJEJsaJ eruos 's a¡.rssassod Sutsn ul urgl s- ¡e.rn1d Sursn ul al¿Jnff,E aJoru ueuo aJE sJauJeel 'a¡druexa;og 'a8en8uel JeuJEel ur sruJoJ ¡tcnnuruerS3o fre;ncce s IlEIeJ er{I :JaPJo -(re¡ncru

'uosr¡eduor3o nalgo elp roJ ureql ,rr\olle sa8en8ue¡ Ja^\eJ elll{^r'srrafgns aruetuas JoJ sasneP e^IleleJ ruro¡p saBenBuEI lsolu 'a¡dtuexa.to3 lg:re.ralq &qlgrssale aqr ot SurproJJV'selor prtteruruer8 ruaJeJtlP uI sunou {po- ol sesn€¡3 elneler asn sa8en8u¿l ruereJICI '(LL6I) elruro3 PUE uruea) fq pado¡e,rap srsnrlr eAItEIarJo 8un¡uer y :fqcrera¡q lr¡¡¡q¡ssame 'Tooq qw ux ru2q1 asn 2m sE surral aql rf,eHal ol PaPuerul arE suolllugap ag1 .Surgcrar aSenSue¡ puof,as pue r{fr?eser uonrsrnbfB aSrnSue¡ E el€q reqr suJatl suleluor frtssolS eq1 puooas ul Surureu IBf,IuI{:at :o pt:ads

,TUVSSO-ID

214

Glossary

surrounding environment and are positively reinforced for doing so, habit formation (or learning) occurs.

bilingual education: Schooling in which students receive instruction in two (or more) languages, usually their home language and a second language.

bilingualism:

The abiliry ro use more than one language. The word itself ofproficiency in either language.

does not specify the degree

brain imaging: A variety of techniques that allow researchers to observe and track activity in the brain. child-directed speech: The language that caretakers address to children. In some cases, this language is simpler than that which is addressed to adults. In some cultures, it is also slower, higher pitched, more reperitive, and includes a large number of questions.

chunk: A unit of language that is often

perceived or used as a single unit.

Chunks include formulaic expressions such as Tbank yu or What's that?but also bits of language that frequently occur together, for example, ice cream cone or signifcant dffirence. classroom observation scheme: A tool (often in the form of a grid) that consists of a set of predetermined categories used to record and describe teaching and learning behaviours.

cognate: Aword in one language that comes from the same origin as a word in another language and has the same meaning, for example, 'nation' in English and nation in French or uACd and uache (cow) in Spanish and French. Thetermfalse cognate is used to refer to words that may come from the same origin but have evolved to have different meanings, for example, librairie (bookstore) in French does not have the same meani ng as library in English.

cognitive: Relating to how the human mind receives, processes, stores, and retrieves information. The focus is on internal learning mechanisms that are believed to be used for learning in general, not just language learning alone.

cognitive maturity: The abiliry to engage in problem-solving, deduction, and complex memory tasks. collaborative dialogue: A conversation between learners in which they work together to solve a problem, for example, reconstructing a story they have heard. \fhile the focus is on the task, learners may also focus on the elements of language that they need to complete the task. communicative competence: The abiliry to use language in a variety of settings, taking into account relationships between speakers and differences

stz

ill^

al{r teqt elg€ue^ eÉurs ar{rJo sruJal ur lluo dnor8 ¡eruaruuadxa aqt ruo{ sreJlp lEqt sJeuJeeljo dnor8 e 'serpnts ¡rtuauuadxa u1 :dnorE IoDuoJ 'rueJagrp aJE ter{t esoqt uer{l a8rn8ue¡ rsJg eqrJo asoqr ot JEIIruls er? ler{t su¡aued a8enSue¡ la8¡el 8ul¡lnboe fr¡nrgrp ssel e^Br{ sreuJeal

lrqt uoltelredxa aql :(HVl) s¡saqrodfq slsf¡eue e rlspnuol

'a8en8uel puof,as JrJr{l ul 'cla 'sf,rleruaqreu 'lrorsrq 'af,ueros lpnrs sruapnls 'sarurue¡8o¡d uors¡aruul ul 'a¡druexa JoC 'slulod a8en8ue¡ uerp Jeql€J Jaueru rralgns punoJe pazrueS;o eJE suossel r{f,rq,4 ur uonf,nrtsur a8en8ur¡ puores :['Igf) Eu¡qnm¡ aten8uu¡ pespg-lualuor

'adorng ur sloor{f,s lrepuooes ser{ regr Surg:ear a8en8ue¡ poseg-tualuof, Eu¡urea¡ palur8elu¡-atenSuu¡ pue lualuor

ul l¡rerulrd padola,r.ap ueag or qoeordde

uV :(-II'I3)

'rar{ro eqt

Jo uonelnre aqr or peal IIrr\ auoJo acuasa.rd aqr reqt sl rr f¡a1l¡ arou agr ';arpaSol uees Jo pJear{ aJE slrun ueuo eJoru aql 'raqraSor paJalunof,ue are faqr sE puru eql ur perfauuooJalur auof,aq reqr strunJo u¡atsls xe¡druoc e se (a8en8ur¡ 8ulpn1:ul) a8pa¡noq3o lroaqr V :usruonrauuor u

o sr u orf, n'r

su

r

J

o r"r

r*

u,

3o óalre,r E agrJJsap ot urJat ¡eraua8

i:ffi

t":tfJ:;ffi';:ffi;i:::

V :uorlonJlsú pesug-uorsuagardruor

'srsegrodfq rndur a¡qrsuaqa;duoc (lS6I) s,ueqser) ot asuodsa¡ ur srsagtodlq sqr pasodord (gge t) urc.r\S '(uaurrzvr ro p.ro) e8en8ue¡ Sulonpord sJeureel uo spuadap uon¡srnbce a8en8uel puof,es

Iryssarrns reqr s¡saqrodf,{ rql :srsaqlodfq lndlno a¡q¡suaqa.rduoc 'acuauadxa¡a8peproul ¡or¡d ¡o'uoneruJoJul lenrxatuof, 'sarntsaS;o esnereg ued

ul a¡glsuarlarduror aq leu lI 'puersJepun uer JeurBel E lrr{t aSen8uel lq pef,nporrur rurer V :¡ndu¡ a¡g¡suaqa.rdruoc

ot raJar or ueqseDl uaqdarg

'ef,ueuJoJJed uor3 aJnleu str JeJur ol e^Bq arn ,(¡rcalp a¡uatadruor elJesgo louutf, e¡a esneJeg '8urlr¡¡L.ro '8ulpea; 'Suluats¡ '3ur¡eads JoJ Jal{teq,/v\-a8en3ue1 sasn f1¡entre uos.lad r ferrr aqr sr q3rq./1\'acueruro3.rad rpvrr perserluof, sl slql 'e8en8ue¡io a8pa¡r'rou1 ot JeJaJ ol ruJat sr{t pesn llsuog3 ruroN tslnSurl :arualadruo¡

'uorlrlosr ur sruJoJ pclterurue.t33o uolre¡ndrueu pue acnc¿¡d eql ueqr Jar{lEJ uonfeJelur ul Sulueau30 uorleJrunruruof, eql sazlsegdura Sulrlceal or rpeordde sn¡1 'sSunras elnelrunruruoo tuaJeglp ur salJas a8en8ue¡ e rrgt sasodrnd pue suorrrunJ ar{t osp rng 'a8rn8uel BJo sruroJ pue seJntrnrrs agrjo a8palz'rou1 e l¡uo tou sa^lolur Sulurua¡ a8en8ue¡ InJsserrns reqr asnua¡d

,ql

uo peseq

sr

¿-Il !(¡T]) Eurgcear etentue¡ e rlerrunruruof,

'lc¿.lnrce

¡ecneturuerSJo llel e3o artds ul sa8essau¡ le,,ruo¡ or lrr¡rqe aqr sr parardJatu uaeg seurneruos seq ruJer eql 'suonenlrs ur ,0asso1g

216

Glossary

researcher is investigating. Performance of the control group is used to show that the variable in question is the best (or only) explanation for changes in

the experimental group. Also sometimes referred to as 'comparison group'.

corpus (plural: corpora): A principled collection of oral or written language samples that can usually be accessed and explored with computerbased tools. Some of the most famous corpora contain millions ofwords from, for example, newspapers. Samples of the language produced by learners have also been collected for second language acquisition research. corpus linguistics: An approach to the study of language that is based on the analysis oflanguage corpora. See corpus.

corrective feedback An indication to target language is incorrect.

a learner

that his or her use of the

correlation: A statistical procedure that compares the relative frequency or size of different variables in order to determine whether there is a

relationship between them. counterbalance h¡rothesis: The hypothesis that learners' attention will be drawn to classroom events that are different from those they are accustomed to.

critical period hypothesis (CPH): The proposal that there is a limited period during which language acquisition can occur. cross-linguistic infuence: The effect on knowledge of one language by the knowledge of another. This term is preferred over previous terms such as interference to indicate that knowledge of one language can be beneficial to learning another. The term also refects the fact that the infuence can go from a known language to the one being learned but also from the new language to one already known. cross-sectional study: A study in which participants at different ages and/or stages of development are studied. This contrasts with longitudinal studies.

declarative knowledge: Information that we have and know we have. An example would be a rule such as 'the verb must agree with the subject to form a correct sentence'. In some skill learning theories, it has been hypothesized that all learning begins with declarative knowledge. This contrasts with p ro c edura I hnow ledge.

descriptive study: Research that does not involve any manipulation, change, or inrervention in the phenomenon being studied. The researcher's goal is to observe and record what is happening. This contrasts with experimental study.

LIZ

lou

erF aJaq^\ ueluof, 3 uI 'Sultles uooJSSEIs e uI fllBnsn 'a8en8ue¡ e3o Sururcal eqr ot sre3ar slgl :tu¡u.rea¡ atentue¡ u8¡e.ro¡

sr e8¿nguBl raBJEr

'llel relpBol sI llEl rau8raroSSo,{¡o8arrc ¡elrads V'sJeureal e8rn8ue¡ Puores or ssarPPE s;a>leads

e

IrEu aruos IEI{I a8en8ue¡ pe5lldurls ro PeglPotu

aql rller raut¡a.ro¡

'a8en8ue¡ (rsJg, euo ueqt arour aAEI{ ol PIES aq

&ru pue r{lJlq uro5 a8zn8ue¡ auo u"qt arolrr uJeel uaJPIrI{r lutyr¡ 'P3uJEel eq1 :(a8en8ue¡ arrnru 'an8uol reqtoul '11) atenEuu¡ rsrg rsrg a8en8ue¡

'su¿d olul rt 8u¡rercdas

lrprgrp a BI{ pue 8uv'rerp alol{ .\ aql ees or PauITf,uI Jrour ere (ruapuadap pleg pa¡ec) sreqro '8urrv''erp perrclduoc e ur sarn85 uaPPIq aql rno ryrd or >lcrnb l¡a¡. a.re 'seeJl aql ro tsaJoJ el{l aas

(ruapuadapul PIeg Pell¿3) a¡doad eruos 'sI letll ot buapuar JIeI{l uI raJIP oli./'r aldoad aglJf,seP :ruePuadap p¡ag¡ruapuadapul PIeU

ol pasn ueeg s"q uollrullslP

sIII

'Sutnas leuollef,npa uE uI alq€rJr^ a¡8urs e ett8rlsalur ot eperu uaaq sEI{ tdruaue uE r{JII{^! uI LIf,J€aseJ ot esues Iefluqf,el-uou 3 ur Pesn sI tuJel aql '>looq slql u1 'lpnls

ot

JaJeJ

suonlPuo)

¡etuarutradxa ,Jutnua8, E sE ParuJat aq or lpnrs ltu¡¡ad lErP ar{]Jo IIE elEaJtr 01 rlnlstp ueuo sr ll 'r{f,rEaseJ lEuonEfnPe uI 'lsarelul e

aqr ur l¡uo rar{lo r{f,Ee ruo5 reJIP 3o (s)alqerre^ el{tJo ef,uasge ¡o acuasa¡d reqr sdno.rS (loJluof,, pue (leluarurradxa, aleq p¡nor'r.,(pnls ¡etuarurradxa

l¡r:urs V'elqEIrE^ reqloue uo salgelr"^ cg¡cads aJour ro euoJo l¡edul aq] rnoqe slsaqrodfq E lsel ol pau8rsap I{3J"esed :r(pnls ¡utuaru¡.radxa

uonrllnsuo3

agl

'suortdl;osap s,Ja Jasqo aql etBPII"^ ol sJagrueru dno-r8 qurvr sE uonr^JasgoSo spor.rad e^Isuelxa sa¡lnba¡ I{JJEasJJ sE

IIa \

'a,urcads.¡ad uzrro sll ulqlllr{ uor3 lttunuulof, Jo dno¡8 E PuersJaPun Ja^lasgo eqt qlrq,/!\ ur r{fJeesar ar'lrdrDsaq :fqdu.rtouqra o1 $laes

'8ur¡rads ur ssans pare.raSSrxa.ro (Sururt.rapun ro adlr ploq) tuJuref,urqua ¡mlqderSodlr or sruau¡ruo¡ ollsrn8ulltletu rtcl¡dxa uor3 8ul8ue¡ ,lnl¡dxa ssel Jo JJoru ag UEJ lI 'sJeuJeel ol lualps eJoru seJnlraJ sI lEI{r rndul :1ndul PerrrBrlua

a8en8ur¡ eruos a>leu

01

'a8en8ue¡ aqr

uoga uE uI PeJellE

jo a8pa¡moul

rel{ ro srq feldsrP ol rrureel aqr ra8 or

(¿nr1s mo[ n ¿nolor pq6 'a¡duexa ro3) suonsanb asaqr >lsr ueuo sragral 'raldsuE aqr s^\oDI lpear¡e ra>l$ aql qlll{¡a ol uo¡tsanb y :uorNenb fu¡dslp

'uolusnboe30 raPJo ¡o

se3¿1s

pruarudola,LeP Pallel

osly.Sulurea¡ a8en8ue¡ ul paJnb:e a.rr (uone8au 'a¡durexa ro3) aSen8url EJo seJnltal uIEtJaJ l{llq1'r uI JJPJo eg1 :acuanbas ¡eluaurdo¡a,rap

.uonualJalul

leuorDnJlsur Jo 'uollelDoru JauJEal 'uolleue^ tndul3o

ssa¡prt8ar 'a¡uenbas;e1n:nred e ul do¡arrap 'san8ea¡¡or slq PuE uuer[euald or Surprore 'qclglrr a8en8uel e3o stcedse asoql :samleal ¡uruarudo¡e,rap ,kassolg

218

Glossary

widely used in the communiry (for example, learning French in China). This is sometimes contrasted with 'second language learning', where the language being learned is used in the communiry (for example, learning Italian in Florence).

form-focused instruction: Instruction that draws attention to the forms and structures of the language within the context of communicative interaction. This may be done by giving metalinguistic information, simply highlighting the form in question, or by providing corrective feedback.

formulaic

Expressions or phrases that are often perceived and learned as For example, a child or second language learner may wholes. unanalysed ''What's first hear that?' as a single unit of language rather than as three

units.

fossilization: This term is used to describe a persistent lack of change in interlanguage patterns, even after extended exposure to or instruction in the target language. 'Words

that are used mainly as linking or supporting words for nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs. For example, prepositions ('to', 'for', 'by') and articles ('d, 'the') are two rypes of function words. Th.y have little or no meaning when they occur alone, but they have an important effect on the meanings of the words they accompany.

function words:

generalization: Extending a pattern learned in one context to another one. See also overgeneralization.

genuine question: A question to which the asker does not know the answer in advance (for example , What did you do last weekend?). Also called 'referential' or'information questions. Contrasts with display question. grammar translation: An approach to second language teaching characterized by the explicit teaching of grammar rules and the use of translation exercises.

grammatical morphemes: Morphemes are the smallest units of language that carry meaning. A simple word is a morpheme (for example, 'book')' but when we talk about 'grammatical morphemes' we are usually referring to smaller units that are added to words to alter their meaning (for example, the -s in 'books' indicates plural) or function words (for example, the) which are ordinarily attached to another word. grammaticality judgement A test or task in which participants are asked to make a decision about whether a sentence is grammatically correct or not. h¡Aotüesis (plural: hypotheses): A statement of a possible fact that can be tested through research. Most empirical research starts from one or more hypotheses and involves the design of a study that can either show stlpport for the hypothesis or disprove it.

6rz

(suolltsJe uof, puE r{3eeds JIaI{1 rglPotu sJe>leeds Jagro qllq.{\ uI asoql uauo ul a8e8ua ot saltlunlJoddo uo PuE saIrIIgE aleuul (slauJeal uo qlog poseg sr uoltlslnbre a8en8uq regr srsaqrodlq aql :slsatpodfq uopce.ralu¡ 'Sulqoear a8rn8uq Pesrq-lu3luo3

apnpul l¡¡ensn tou oP sassel3 -ISE e^Isualul 'satuureJSoJd uolsJerutul or lseJluof, u1 'Sulqrear a8en8ue¡ a IlsslunuruJoc l¡rueuluopard sI sasself, eseql uI Pa^rasgo qoeo-rdde pclSoStpad aq1 'polrad reqr Sulrnp uoltrnrtsul'ISA or slep ¡ry elo^aP pue rca(Iooqls 3uo ul aurlJo lJolq qruotu-J^5 euo ePISB 1as qfJEesarISE e^Isualul uI Pe lasgo sess"lo ar{rJo rsory 'auIll JJotu q3nuJ aPl^o;d sasselc -TSE aAISuaruL -ISgJo o-lt\l Jo JnoI{ u3 l¡uo a,req dno.l8 a3¿ laa1v\ qf,Ee uolllnJlsul srql ur sruapnls caqan| rsoyq'a8enSu¿l Pumes e se qsr¡8ug urcal sluePnls Sur4eads-gcuerC plo-rca Á-U-Ol ererld\ :aqan| ur gceoldde leuollrnrtsul ue ot JeJaJ ot Pasn sl -ISg (eAISueluI,

'looq srql uI :TSg aarsuelul

'dno¡3 r?r{rJo sragluaw e{ll aJou ag or arrsep 3 ue^a pue dnorS aSenSur¡ raSJBl jo ólunuluof, pue aJntlnf, arfl lnoge aJoru ^\ou>l ol eJISaP e uo Paseq JoJ uo¡E^now :uopte rloru a,r¡lerEalu¡

arir

,, r"gr Sururea¡ aSenSue¡ puoJes

'qof;arraq e la8 ol rePro uI a8tn8uq egr urral or Peau aql sE qf,ns'¡ecncerd l¡pnuassa sr lEI{l uonelllory ¡uolle l}oru l¿lueurn.rlsur 'uollrstnbct a8en8ue¡ JoJ rualf,Sns sl lndul a¡grsuaqardurof, JaI{tJIf$ or PeleleJ suorlsanb aro¡dxa or sl:alo¡d l{fJeeseJ .sreuJBel JrruEaJ a8en3url re¡ncrrred eqt ur ol lndul ur pesn uaaq sEr{ rI :poog rndu¡ e3o sa¡drurxaJo raqunu aSrr¡ e Surpnord ro3 anbluqcar

y

'lueuruoJl^ua aqt uI Jo ualtlrlr\ raqrra) or pasodxa sI rauJEel aqr rBqr a8rnSue¡

(ua>1ods

aq1 :rndu¡

'a8en8ue¡jo uotllslnbce agr -roj l1¡ecgrcads pau8tsaP ert rer{r seJntf,nJls IEruaru qlL!\ uJog arz sSulag uElunr{ tegr srsaqrodlr{ 3r{1 uo Paseq a.upads¡ad [EJrreJoeqr aql $ sn{l 'I{sJEesaJ uorttslnbcr a8en8ue¡ uI :lsDeuul 'as¡a Surqratuos uo snf,oJ JoJ elqelle^E uollueue a¡ou¡ Sur,rra¡ ':ttetuolne aruooeg uolluatls pallnbar lsJU rB q3ry^\ s8u¡qr

,a:ll¡e¡d pue a:uarradxa pateadar qrv!\ rng 'arull sIuBS aqr re Surr¡rfrarra ot uonuJlle led f¡ec laqf pur PefIuII aJE sef,Jnosa¡ a,rtltuSoo (sJauftel

r?r{r Eepr aqt uo paseq.{-roaqr ¡ecr8o¡orlclsd

y

:8u¡ssa¡o¡d uoperuroJul

'sJeuJtal a8en8uq PuoJesJo sPaeu Jqr 13eu 01 slBrJslErrr pue aSenSuel FuonJnJlsur Jrer{l rsnfpe sJaq)Eel PUE a8rn8uel tsJg arues aqr aJrqs saruue¡8o¡d uoISJauIluI uI sluePnls 'l¡rcldfa .r8ená.re¡ puof,as Jraqt ur sarpnls Fllos pu' sr'€ueqrEu w grns srcafqns

lpnrs sruapnls ,sr tegl .uo¡fnJlsul Paseg-luaruoo u,r tg8ne_t sr a8tn8uel puofes 3 r{3¡l \ ul au¡(uer8o;d ¡euolteonpe uv :auru¡e¡Eo¡d uorsJerurur

úassolg

220

Glossary

their interaction patterns to match the learners' communication requirements. The innate abilities are not seen as being specific to language or language acquisition.

interlanguage: A learner's developing second language knowledge. It may have characteristics ofthe learnerb first language, characteristics ofthe second language, and some characteristics that seem to be very general and tend to occur in all or most interlanguage systems. Interlanguages are systematic, but they are also dynamic. They change as learners receive more input and revise their hypotheses about the second language.

interlocutor: A participant in a conversation. language acquisition/language learning: In this book, these two terms are most often used interchangeably. However, for some researchers, most notably Stephen Krashen acquisition represents 'unconscious' internalization of language knowledge,which takes place when attention is focused on meaning rather than language form, and learningis described as a'conscious' process that occurs when the learnert objective is to learn about the language itself, rather than to understand messages conveyed through the language.

language-related episodes (LREs): Parts of conversational interactions in which language learners talk about the language forms they are using and engage in self- and peer-correction.

longitudinal study: A study in which the same learners are studied over period of time. This contrasts with a cross-sectional study. meaning-based instruction:

See

a

communicative language teaching.

meta-analysis (plural: meta-analyses): A statistical procedure that allows researchers to combine the findings from a large number of quantitative studies in order to assess the overall patterns of findings on a similar topic.

metalinguistic awareness: The abiliry to treat language as an object, for example, being able to define a word, or to say what sounds make up that word.

mitigation: In pragmatics,

a phrase or tone

ofvoice used to reduce or

soften the possible negative impact ofwhat is said.

modified inpuc Adapted speech that adults use to address children and natiye speakers use to address language learners so that they will be able to understand. Examples of modified input include shorter, simpler sentences, and basic vocabulary.

modified interaction: Adapted conversation patterns that proficient speakers use in addressing language learners so that the learner will be able to understand. Examples of interactional modifications include comprehension checks, clarification requests, and self-repetitions.

rzz

'elq"ts aJou¡

sr

taleads a ItEu aJnteu aql

JoJ lseal t¿ 'acualadruof, sEeJaI{/'t an8rre; Jo uoltuetleul ol anP suoItEIJs ol roalqns sr erueruJoJra¿ 'a8en8uel esn 01 lrtllq" rno sellraPun teqr a8pe¡r'rour1 aql sr r{f,rryr\'arualadruol qlr^\ PalseJruo: l¡ensn sI sf,uEluJoJJa¿ 'Sulrurnr 'Sulpea; 'Suqeads 'Surualstl ul a8en8ue¡ asn a¡vr lervr ag1 :erueruro¡.rad '

goro.rdde ¡en8ur¡orpne aqr

ol uasol{J soJuatuas asrlo¿¡d 3o ¡erldl¿'sruJoJ cltsn8ul¡;elnorued tuasa¡da.r or pe>lse ar€ sreuJeel r{rlq1n ur anbluqcar Sutr¡oear V :llIJP ecpcerd uJeDEd ',rq8nog,3o ppalsul .palnq, uI s? 'qJeA Jeln8aur ue uoButpua pa' ;ep8a; ¿ Surund 'aldurrxa .ro3 '8uo¡aq lou seop lr aJaqd\ lxetuoJ E uI u¡au¿d ro elnr E esn ol 8uúrr3o rlnser el{r sI rorreJo adlr slql :uolluzlfuJeuaS¡a,ro 'acuanbas pruarudola,rap ees :uopls¡nbcu¡o .rapro

'txeluof, regl uI qra^ aI{}Jo uroS parlnbar aqr pesn rou sEI{ lnq '¡ee,&\ tse-LJo esn eqt lq esual rsed aql JoJ lxatuof, lroreSrlqo uB petEeJJ seq .ra>pads el{l (,JEf E tual JaqloJg Áu 'laarrr lse1, af,ualues aqr ut 'aldruexa JoC 'tfeJJof ag o] sI ssuetues aqr3l pa-rrnbeJ sI luJoJ ¡mrteuruer8 repcnred e eJaq./v\ af,ualuas E uI saJBId :$xaluoc l¡oruE¡go

'lndul aqt uIJo

eJErv'B

aruo3eg Jo rsJg e^EI{ laqr r1clq.,ra. reqr l¡uo urcel sJauJEa¡ a8en8ur¡ (pef,nou, lq pasodo.rd 'srsaqrodfq aql :srserpodfq tu¡rpou

rErF

(rprurq3s preqrDl

'uonf,EJelul PsglPour oslE e3s 'uollEflunurluof, uI u,t.ropltaJq e ¡rrda¡ ot sanbturpal Jarpo asn PuE graads Jlaql ol sluaulsnlpe or{^\ s.ra>pads uaa^uaq uoltf?Jetul :Surrruau¡.ro¡ uopupoteu

aleu

l

'ruar{l roJ Surpr,rord3o pealsul ruroS rq8¡.r eqr PuU or sluapnrs aprn8 or qeas eqs Jo aI{ 'uollf€Jelul aql uI Pe^lo^ul sr Jel{f¿al E uI tuJo3 llaJJof, aqr PJE,t\ol

eJI 'poolsJapun

sI

Suruearu aJag \ txeluof,

>lJo,{\ sJJuJpe¡ e8en8ue¡

qrl{¡a uI uolt3eJalul uV :rr¡JoJJo uoperlo8au 'a¡uanbas ptuarudo¡ar'ap ees :raPro IPmlEu 'sa8en8ue¡ lsoru Jo,sra>leads

a^rleU, Suoue uoIlEIJeA ePIl\ sl eJerlt asnsseq dnor8 f,Iluouof,aolfos ¡o uor8al olqdeJSoa8 rgtcads 3 ull{lv!\ PoolsJePun eg sftz'r¡e lsnu ,re>¡eads

a

IIBU,

uoltou aq¡ 'aBenBuEI aqr3o ¡rutur¡8

f,IsEg el{r uo ea¡3¿

or pual laqr rnq 'asn e8en8uelSo sradse rrrsr¡lrs pue lrelnqerolJo sluJel uI ragrp sra>lrads a,rrre¡ 'a8en8ue¡ teqr uI tuanyord f¡ry aq or PauaaP sI oI{^\ y :ra>pads eapeu

pue a8e l¡:ea ue uo.t3 aBenBuEI ra>1eads e^Iteu EJo ter{r

E

PeuJEal set{ oqlr\ uos¡ad

ruo{ alqeqsm8unstput sI leqr aouerurolradJo Ia^el puaqardu¡or ol &lllq" aql :aTI-e Deu

e le a8en8uel pumas e acnpord pue

'sauraqd;oru prtteruurrr8 aag :aruaqd.rou [tassolg

222

Glossary

phonemic

Small differences in language sounds that can change meaning

within a particular language. For example, the consonants p and b are phonemic in English, but not in Arabic.

pragmatics: Aspects of language use that go beyond vocabulary and grammar to include rules of how to use language appropriately in different contexts and with different speakers. It also includes an understanding of the implied as well as the explicit meaning of language. private speech: The language we

use when we are

talking ro ourselves, not

expecting anyone to hear or respond.

procedural knowledge Knowledge that underlies fluent or automatic performance. It is contrasted with declarative knowledge. processability theory: Manfred Pienemann's theory of learners' developing ability to process linguistic elements in different senrence positions. processing instruction: An approach to instruction in which learners are given explicit information about the language feature to be learned and their practice activities involve the comprehension (not production) of sentences or texts that cannot be understood without a focus on the language itself, The approach was developed by Bill VanPamen.

qualitative research: An approach that uses detailed descriptions of the phenomena being studied rather than counting or measuring the exact amount of some specific variable or variables. Qualitative research requires extensive observation and insightful interpretation. quantitative research: An approach that requires precise counts or numeric measurements ofvariables. In a quantitative stud¡ both the variable that is believed to affect learning and the learning itself are measured or'quantified'. Quantitative research requires careful selection of the measurements that will be used to represenr the variables being studied. rate oflearning: The speed with which learners progress in their language development.

recase To repeat a learner's incorrect utterance, making changes that convert it to a correct phrase or sentence. 'Recast' is also used as a noun, that is, a recast is the interlocutor's modified/corrected form of the learner's utrerance.

register: A style or way of using language that is rypical of or appropriate for a particular setting. For example, speaking and writing usually require different registers; the register used in writing a research report is different from that used in writing a letter to a friend.

restructuring: Cognitive activify that is seen as causing changes in the way information is organized in the brain, even though no new information has been learned.

8,27,

aqt eprsrno ur a8e8ua rq8rur sJauJeal esoql ot JEIIruls ($lset, aJE sanr^nfe ruoorsself, r{rlq^\ ur uonf,nrlsul :[-IgJ) Eu¡gcuar aSunEue¡ pesuq-{spr 'a8en8ue¡ (quno; Jo prrqt.ro) puooas e ro a8en8ue¡ rsJg ar{r sr lr rer{ler{ r 'pau;ea¡ Suraq aSenSuEI

er{I

:a8un8ue¡ raErer

'spunos pnplrupur Jo uonelcunuo¡d arp urr{t raqrer '(uorreuolur pue ssaJls '3'a) a8en8uel erpJo uqrfgr

pue

fpo¡au aql eAIoAur regr a8en8uel EJo spunos rr{l :spluau¡Eesp¡dns

'parlnbre sl a8en8uel puof,as ? s¿ a8en8ue¡ rsrg erp Surso¡

llara¡duor

-ro

llprrre¿

:rusr¡enEur¡Iq e lrf,prrqns

'saJnteeJ prrteruuerS 3o lrrxalduroc

E

ur eseaJlur pnprr8 E sr uonezrueS.ro arp JoJ srseq eql 'suossel Jo 1ooqlxal :Eu¡oe.rt ¡e.rnlrn.rls ur l?rraleur 8ur¡uanbas rcSutztue8to ro3 anbluq:ar

y

'sallarJel f,ruJouooaorf,os pue'¡euol8a.r'f,ruqle snoJeurnu sB IIe,t se 'ltar¡e,r pJepuers u1v\o stl sBI{ I{f,Ba qslSug uEIpuI pu" 'qs¡¡8ug uErpEuEJ 'gs¡¡8uE r{snrrg 'qs¡¡8uE uef,rreruv'a¡durtxa rog 'saoe¡d ruereJlp uI ruaraJlp aq leru saSrn8url ua>¡ods llaprm3o &ar¡e,r prepuers aql '(Sunserprorg Sulpn¡our) 8uu¡eads crlqnd IEruroJ pue Suntrrnr IBturoJ reqr a8enSue¡ ua,tr8 e jo Áet¡err aq1 :&arre,r preprrers ur pesn

l¡¡ecldlr

sI

'lenpr^rpur arp lq pazrTruJetur sr r{f,rr{,l aSpa¡.la.ou1 lf,nJlsuoo lpulol sJeuJeel 'uollef,tunrutuo¡ Surrnp ler{r $ rurelr JqI'uonreJerul ace;-or-ef,EJ ur anSoprp uo ruapuadap sr tr 'sr rerp 'palerperu l¡plros sI lel{l ssaco¡d E sB Pa,t\el^ st Sulureal 'lBnpl^¡pul uaql IEIJos tsr5 sr Suturea¡ IIE lEI{t uolldunsse er{t uo Pesrg $ reqr Sururea¡ pue a8pa¡zvtonl JoJ uoneue¡dxa uy :Lroeqr [pJnl[nJorJos '(,leprarsal oB a¡1 frpor oB 1,) asuar 'ragrunu 'uosrad3o ssalp-re8a.r qre^ BJo ruro1 arues aqt Sursn 'a¡druexa JoJ 'ef,ualues EJo sruaua¡a tno SuneaT :uoDeJ5¡¡dru¡s 'azrs Jraqt sB louarslsuoc eql or enp sI ,ef,u¿Jylu8ls, IIe.&\ s" safuaJeJlp eqlJo rraql 'e8rrl ro llerus eg uE3 serueraglp I{lnS 'aoueq: lq pauadd¿q a^eq o} f¡e1¡un eJE 'slser lzf,nsnelsJo ke\rc¡e ot Sutprooce ',{rl.l^ sdno¡8 uea uag :ef,uaJeju[P ruurg¡u8¡s sef,uaJaglp ol sJaJeJ lrr{l ruJal Ff,rur{3al E sr

sql

'

uoneuolur Jo su.rallrd

aJe rlf,

IrlA{',s¡rtuatuSasrt dns,

qrl/( perserruo3 'aSen8uel EJo spunos lenpl^lpul eq1 :¡uluauSas 'a8en8ue¡ qunoJ

ro prrqr aqr or reJer l¡enrre leru u 'snql 'paur¿a¡ a8en8ue¡ tsrg aq] u¿qt (>loog slqr uI :(ZT) aEen8ue¡ Puoras raqro a8en8ue¡ fue ot srajer ruret eqr 'eoueluas ata¡duorul 3o uolsvtord eqr

s

ra>pads arpJo uolsurdxa aqr ro ,fte1nqeco,r Sulssrru

ePnllur,ftu

r1

:aleeds JaqrouEJo ssaf,fns e^IlEf,IunuJluof aq1 :Eum¡ogrcs

agt rroddns ol sasn rolnrolratul ue teql a8en8ut¡ fuassolg

224

Glossary

second or foreign language classroom. Tasks may be complex, for example, creating a school newspaper, or more limited, for example, making a phone call to reserve a train ticket.

teacher

talk:

See

modified input and foreigner talk.

transfer: The infuence of a learnert first language knowledge in the second language. Also called'interference'. The term'cross-linguistic influence' is now preferred by many researchers. It better reflects the complex ways in which knowledge of the first language may affect learners'

knowledge and use of another.

transfer-appropriate processing (TAP)

:

Cognitive psychologists have observed that when we learn something new, we also internalize some aspects of the circumstances and thinking processes that were present when we learned it. The TAP hypothesis is that knowledge is easier to retrieve ifwe are returned to or can recreate those circumstances and thinking processes.

universal gramm¡ü (UG): Innate linguistic knowledge which, it is hypothesized, consists of a set of principles common to all languages. This term is associated with Chomsky's theory of language acquisition.

uptake: This term is sometimes used in a general

to refer to what learner notices and/or retains in second language input or instruction. Lyster and Ranta's (1997) definition refers to a learnert observable immediate response to corrective feedback on his/her utterances. sense

variabls An element or characteristic that can be measured

a

or defined.

Variables can differ in different groups or change over time within a group or individual. Some examples ofvariables that are commonly examined in language acquisition research include the amount of time a person has been learning the language, scores on aptirude tests, and performance on measures of language knowledge.

variational features: In contrast to the developmental features in the framework developed by Pienemann and his colleagues, variational features (for example, vocabular¡ some grammatical morphemes) can be learned at any point in the learnerb development.

variety: Away of speaking and using language that is typical of a particular regional, socioeconomic, or ethnic group. The term'dialect' is sometimes used. Some language varieties are stigmatized as 'uneducated' but each language variety has its own rules and patterns that are as complex and systematic as those of the so-called 'standard' language. Among the most studied non-standard varieties of English are British Cockney and African-

American Vernacular English.

willingness to communicate (\WTC): The predisposition of learners toward or away from communicating in a second/foreign language. Several

SZZ

'CdZ s,JauJeel aqt ur uonreralur 8ul-rnp pue qSnorqr are¡d sa>pt Sulu;ea1 'l.roerp s,llsro8l¡ uI 'JolnoolJalur uE r{tr,r\ uonf,EJetur ruory r¡oddns sr aJaql esnef,aq ecueru;ojradJo Ie el raq8rq ejo a¡qedec sr JauJEal E qrFI^A ur ,ace¡d, ¡eorrogdztau aql :(CI¿Z) luaurdo¡a,rap prurxo.rd lo euoz 'l¡oruaru uJer-iloqs, pelpf, os[V'snJoJ ur lpua;rnr sr reqr uolltruJoJur Jo uoneruJoJur 1v\au ssaco¡d f¡anrrre e \ qllq^\ ur ,aoeds, a,rrtruSo¡ aql :(nL4¡,.) lrouau Suptron 'lEuonEADoIU

pue '¡euonenrrs 'lenpl^lpur 'lerios Sulpn¡rul

fIlN

ol alnqrJluof, sroDe3

ttassolg

>lroÁ

&rsre,rru¡

'ssard u?8rr{frwJo :11¡¡ 'roqry uuy 'saqraaJ.tot sulnn&utT snúoy :ruoo"tstal)

&uru.taa7 a8anSuaT aqt ur

^\eN

:>lro ,/daN

andto7Suln '0rcT, 'U'g (rauueg

'17IZ-06l óLe 'P '3f,ualrsJo fuapeoy ztuangto truapacV 4to¡ ma¡¡ aqlto tl?uuv 'uotfinnbtV put aSun&uuT aatxa¡¡:('pa) zuur¿¡'g ut ,sar8alerls

a7an&uaT u8tato¿

¡enrdacrad pue 'Jnuerues 'ltt¿ru8e¡¿ :e,utcadsrad tst¡euotlcunJ E lrroü (sarug uortrsrnbce a8rn8ue¡-puoras, 'I 86I rbuu¡r'¿j([c¿W 'g PUE 'y 'g

'L;-Stt,

'dd

'ssa.r¿

órsra.ttu¡

pro3xo :proJxo z&an&uaT "rautaaT Suts[luuV '$pa) uazmlPlrtg 'D Pue slllg 'd ur ,a8en8url raureel3o sasl¡eue paseg-rarndruo3, '1002 'W .naolreg ' 0e- G LZ : € | g I u oxtx stn btV a8anSua7 pu ora S sat?nls'luaudo¡arap rneurSerd30 fpnrs ¡eurpnuSuol v qlEt rlluaPef,E Jo salnr aqr Sururtal ,'€.G6I 'ProprBH'S'g PuE'X'EI¡eH-I^oPrBB 17

ux

'113./vDIrEIg :

uo

tl

t sm

b

ty

a&a

n&ua 7 pu o t a g

u

t

:ProJxO 'an ?u? Buruaa¡\¡'ru.r0¿

e a dsv ? uv

asu

aJ'

000 '

Z'X'8ureH-r,loPreg

EI L- LL9

:V

¡

6y &uru"raa7

a&an&uu7,'scrleur8r.rd ¡euouslnbce ro3 rpua8e I{JJ¿asaJ y :scneur8rrd a8rn8ue¡rarul Jo a8enSuelrerur eqr 8ur.ro¡dxg,' 6 6 6 I'>l'8¡re¡¡-¡,top.reg ' a8pa¡rn

Sur r t¡X¡ p ua Bulpa a¿ S u T dol a a a

o¡

e'

:>lr oÁ

./rcN' u a uta a 7

afla nflua 7 -y

g002' ('sPa) uPTPrrBqS'I Pue'

u ot a

5 ut

q'rsn8ny

dtl¡,4N qro¡.&\aN '

r'pa

oddV patatSatu¡ uy : úo

'B6-L9l 'dd :a/n.rg

ep

rua¡¡¡ pua &urutua7'

t 66I'¿'f

(uos.rapuy

uornory :uePratsurv 'uotltsmbtyaSan&uaT puotag

pzpn4sul ut suoqaStlsartu¡ :('spa) PrErraI¿ 'ntr PuE uasnoH 'y ur ¡sr¡8uE30 sJauJtel qr-ryfq sesnelf, e^nEIaJJo uotllsrnbre aqt tnogr aJour-saJnl3nJls (reruury crrsm8ur¡ pelrctu Surqcra¿, '1002 'u¡aoqrrlSn'W U PuE

y

'

1B-eS

:

¡ ¡ Et7

stunn&utT

pallddylo maxnaY lauoxj?u¿ajuJ,'a8en8ue¡ Puofes e uI sJalsnlf lu?uosuof, Jo uorrrnpord puz'uorldac.rad'ruau8pnl ¿gL,' t¡OZ ¿'g'8.raguarly 'Sulpear ral{unJ.ro3 parsaSSns uaaq e^Er{ 1"q1 esoql se ile./r^. s€

lxal

3q1

uI PalIf, slJo1v\ eql IIE raqraSor

sSur-rq

lsII sn{I

I.HdVUDOITgIg

228

Bibliography Beretta, A. 201 1. 'The language learning brain' in M. Long and C. Doughry (eds.): The Handbooh of Language Teaching. Oxford:'$lileyBlackwell. pp.65-80.

Berko Gleason,J. 'The childt learning of English morphology.' Word 14, 150-77. Berko Gleason,J. and N. Bernstein-Ratner (eds.). 2009. of Language7th edn. NewYork Ailyn and Bacon.

The Deuelopment

Bialystok, E. 2001. Bilingualisrn in Deuelopment: Language, Literacy, and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. E .2009. 'Effects of bilingualism on cognitive and linguistic performance across the lifespan' in I. Gogolin and U. Neumann (eds.): Streifa ll Zweisp rac h igh e it-Th e Bi lingua lis m C ontrou ersy. Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag fur S ozialwissenschaften . pp. 5 3 -68'

Bialystok

Bley-Vroman, R. 1990. 'The logical problem of foreign language learning.' Linguistic Analysis

Bloom,

L.l99l.

20ll-2: 347

.

Language Deuelopmentfom Two to Tltree. Cambridge:

Cambridge Universiry

Press.

Bloorn, L. and M. Lahey. 1978. Language Deuelopment and Language D is o rders. New York John'Sfliley. Bongaerts, T. 1999. 'Ultimate attainmenr in L2 pronunciation: The case ofvery advanced lateL2learners' in D. Birdsong (ed'): Second Language Acquisition and the Critical Period Hypothesls. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates. pp. 133-59.

Brools, N. 1960. Language and Language Learning. NewYork: Harcourt Brace. Brown, R.1973. A First Language: Harvard University Press. Burns, A- 2010. DoingAction

The

Research

Early Sages. Cambridge, MA:

in English Language Teaching: A

Guidr for Practitioners. New York Routledge. Burstall, C.1975. 'French in the primary school: The British experiment.' Canadian Modern Language Reuiew 3l I 5: 388402.

Carroll, J. 199 1 . 'Cognitive abilities in foreign language aptitude: Then and nov/ in T. Parry and C. Stansfield (eds.): Language Aptitude Reconsidered. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice hall. Carroll, J. and S. Sapon. 1959. The Modern Languages Aptitude San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation'

Tbst.

6ZZ

ut

.?l 'ssard rruapBf,v :>lro^ .4^¿ N tl) ?l la [ag-u.tayo¡71¡ ato r(prug nlun&uqotpb¿ V:axuag 'LL6I'S (ssnrnJ 'sreuery ¡en8unnpyq :uopa^al3 'a"q[ssot3 ar¡t pnSuutg :,(So8rya¿ pu? ¿amo¿ u&un&ua7'0002 .Í.suluum3 1

uWyl)

'srauery pn8urp¡nyr¡ :uopa^elJ tuau¿stastv u! sansq :uoxtprn?g lauadg pua wvTanSu1tg

'lSo8upa¿

puu

'7g6I .[,sulturun)

9 09- LB, : E ¡ 97 r(1taua"Ó SE¿,'alduexa rlnul uV :uorlrsrnbce a8en8ue¡ puolas pue uonf,EJetur elnef,runuJuro3, '7.66I .W.o8e.r3

rc

'

'69-19I :e-T1g stusm&utT yalddVto .s l?uottryunluJ (.sJorJa (sraur8olJo aouecyluS¡s eyL,.Lg6l a

maxnaü

ÍepJo)

'uonefnPg raPPoH :uoPuoT 'upa

Sutqtaa¿ aSan&uaT puu &urutaa7 a8an&uu7 ?uoras '8002

qttT

'

IZ-I

07,

;

g

71.{oof,

¡ 1r7 tc un n&utT

paqddylo mat(taü /puoxi?u¿aru1,'qsr¡8uE3o srasn Z'I ur fcuapuadap -ernlf,nrts pue ruarun8Je snlnruns-aqr-3o-lrra,rod ag1,'8002 .¡'{oof, ' BV-|, 7, :Z l, I' 2 r ua, r S pt ua ut dop n a g,' u ondacta d qcaads aSen8ue¡-puof,es pu¿ -tsJgJo seJnseeu¡ urerg :fcuejur ur acuar¡adxa a8enSue¡puof,asJo nedrul, 'I I0Z'HnX'X U pue 'q'g'foguo3

'08-999:r/lCg

[ltauanl TOS{J lool alrsualur

', 6-eV

a

u

a8rn8ue¡

a

: ¡79 SututaaT aSanfluaT,'l8o¡oqd-roru produar3o uoIlISInb3E radsr ltrrxal put acuangul ITJo selor ar{L '2002'1'su¡¡¡o3 1

aqr ur

xdse'qcreag'sndro3¡sndJof, An'of, 'sun¡ocznr,,'rru77:drrg

suIIIof,

.ra¡dureg uop¿f,ollo3 prre af,rrpproruoD plr.nqo3

'rc-609

:E¡E7

[1"rat"ra"ó puof,es E ur lueuralarr{f,e IOSE¿ ,'a8en8ue¡ y ¿8uo¡ ¡1'oH, '686I ¿ n(ra¡¡¡o3

f,rruepert uo r{rrtasarJo slsagtuls

' 60Z-0 6I :7 ¡ 77 [&op q ils¿ tlt o g yua a&an&uaflo putnof ,'Át1et;u' pue 'sru.rou 'txaluo:3o sDega agl :aBrnSuEI puoles e ur aleorunruruof, or ssauSuq¡r¿6,'e007. 'a.rfru¡cc¡4J'6¡ U pu"'""T"9'C'S "U rluaur?l) 'gg-92:1¡gE a3an3ua7 'g fq ((Jorltqag pqre¡,,Jo,&\el^a¡, '616I 'N'Á1sruog3 1

('JeuuDIS 'C

'ssar¿ órsra,rru¡ a8prrqrue3 :aSplrquea'sa8an8urT n q t g to ua 4 a a dg ot t¡ s lpuE to s# q r p aJ nt a ruatala¿ V : u o xt? n unu o,,t¿ Su1rpaa¿'966I 'ulmpoo9 'IAI'[puE (uolurrg "Í{'C ('I l relf,ml l-erlaD

[t¡druflouqry

230

Bibliography

Dalton-Puffe r, C. 200 6.'Questions in CLIL classrooms: Strategic questioning to encourage speaking' in A. Martinez-Flor and E. Uso (eds.): New Perspectiues on Teaching the Language Processing Skills. Amsterdam:

Mouton de Gruyter. pp.187-213. Day, R.,J. Bassett, B. Bowler, S. Parminter, N. Bullard, N. Prentice, M. Furr, M. Mahmood, D. Stewart, and T Robb. 2011. Bringing Extensiue Reading into the Classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DeKeyser, R. M. 1998. 'Beyond focus on form: Cognitive Perspectives on learning and practicing second language grammar' in C. J. Doughry and J. \lilliams (eds.): Focus on Form in Ckssroom Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 42-63.

DeKeyser, R. M. 2000. 'The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition.' Studies in Second Language Acquisition22l4:

493-533. DeKeyser, R. M. 2001. Automaticiry and automatization' in P Robinson (ed.): Cognition and Second Language Instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge Universiry Press. pp. 125-51. DeKeyser, R. M. 2007.'Introduction: Situating the concept of practice' in R. DeKeyser (ed.): Practice in a Second Lnngudge: Perspectiuesfom Applied Linguistics and Cognhiue Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge Universiry Press. pp. 1-18.

deVilliers,J. G. and

P.

A. deVilliers,lg73' A cross-sectional study of the

acquisition of grammatical morphemes.' Journal of Psycholinguistic

Research

213:267-78. Derwing, T. M. and M.J. Munro.2009' 'Putting accent in its place: Rethinking obstacles to communication.' Language Teaching 42 I 4: 47 6-90. Derwing, T M. and M. Rossiter. 2003.'The effects of pronunciation instruction on the accuracy, fuenc¡ and complexity of L2 accented speech.' App lied Language Learning I 3 I I : I -17 . Donato, R.1994. 'Collective scaffolding in second language learning' in J. Lantolf and G. Appel (eds.): VygoxkianApproaches to Second Language Research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. pp.33-56. Dórnyei, 2.2007a. Motiuational Strategies in the Language Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge Universiry Press. Dórnyei, Z. 200Ib. Longman.

Teach

ing and Researc h ing Motiuation. Harlow:

Dórnyei, 2.2005. The Psychologt of the Language Learner: Indiuidual Dffirences in Second LanguageAcquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates.

ttT

'

gg

t- 6t I'dd'¡amlcelg-falyN

:VW 'ueppt ü '&u1cyna¿ a8unSuaTto Woq?upH aql :gpa) 3uo1 .¡1 '7,q pue lrq8noq 'f 'f, rl ,Sururea¡ pesnro;-ruroJ pue pe$q-a8esn ur 3ur¡dues pue lcuanbar¿ :rndur aqr Surznundo, '6002 .3 .N.slilg

'zs-90€.:ztL7, uotsnnbcV a&anSuaT puocag u! saryruS,'a8pa¡rtou1 a8en8ue¡ rnlldrur pue rrcl¡dxa3o suonf,eJerur clrueulg :af,EJralur eqt tV 'S0OT.D.N.slilg .eu-€.9.dd '

IIa-{DITEI

g proJXO' :

u o t I t n rcb

'f

ty

a8anSuaT p u o t a g to

ry o q ? u?H a q1 : $pa)

3uo1 '¡1 'htr pue lrg8noq 'f .rl (ernlf,nns a8en8ue¡ puof,asJo acuaS¡arua ar r, :ursruonf,euuof pue'8ul1unqf, ,suonrnJtsuo3,'e00Z D.N,sIIIfl '88

I

-87 I

:Z

l

rZ u oxtxsxnbtV

aBanSuYT Puoras

w sat?ruS

,'uonrslnble a8en8uel lcr¡dxa pue rrol¡dul Jo serJoe{p .ro1 suoneclldrur y :uolrrsnbce a8en8uel ur slf,aJe buanbarg, '2007,.J.N .sIIIfl

tltl4A 1r\er^Jr

'89-t8.'dd 'ssar¿

&rsra,rru¡ a8prrque3 :a8plrqure)'uoxpnusu¡ aSan&uuT ?uoras ?up uoutuSoS:('pa) uosurqo¡ A ul ,a8en8ue¡ ro3l.rouraytr, 'I002 .f, .N.slilA ' OZ- I : I I 6 stuun&urT patl ddV,' a?en?uu¡ puooas e se qsl¡8uE3o uorlrslnbr¿ eqt ur uononJrsur esnelf, e^nEIaJJo uonezrleraua8 aqr uO, '886I 'uosleN'(I put .llrg'T (g (uuurlcg

'uosJsed

:uorsog 1a?ory ruaru o) '

Zr-I

¿06

aql :t"4au.¿/a7 aSrn&uaT c¡s1puE ntalqtsuaqatdutoS Z'r.roq5' [' q pre.rEoA'I4I " f 'e¡.r.ruraqcg

3u 7 4 a¡1¡' 100

l,

:E

¡

gy SurutaaT a3an3ua7 r'salroal{l elq¿rnsuauruorul

:stfnJlsuof, alqeJnsueruruof,ul : I +r sueqsur) pue ruarudola,raq Ieurrxord Jo auoT

s

lxsro3út,'

gG¡.;¡

JIorurJ'd'[ put'fl

'¿C\,uun(I

' Le-909 :E¡67 [\taua"Ó IOSE¿, drr8ung uI sruoorssels uorsJaruurr ur uonefruntutuorJo lqderSouqle aV,'9661 A .Jnq¡ 'Bg-rI1 'dd 'ssar¿ órsra,rru¡ a8prrque3 :a8prrqrue3 'WS utoo$tal) ux uttol uo tnroi:('spa) suBrTIrlN 'f pur lrq8no6l 'f ul ,ruJoJ uo snroJ a^nef,runurulo3, '866I '¿lalp 'g puB 'C ,ftqEnoq

'

69-It,

:,

I

€I

uoxttsxrcbtV a7an&uaT

?uzJas ux sax?ws ('uon¿zr^n¿lerlsJo lpnrs ¡rclrrdura uE tuog af,uappg E a>leru saop uonrnrtsul e8en8uel puoras, 'I66I ')'frgEnoq

:eJuera5lp

' :proJXO' uotu nnbtV a8an&uuT puotag to 0e9-6BS'dd'¡ampzlg rl ,Sururee¡ a8en8ue¡ yooq?u?H aql :$pa) 3uo1 '¡1 'ntr pu? lrq8noq 'f puof,as ur saruaraglp Ienpr^rpul,'9007, 'uBrlaIS ?J pue '7'rcÁutgq

')

'ssar¿

:proJxo'

u

o

t y n n b cV a7a n&u a

7 p u o t a g to r(3 op q tG¿

a

Álsrartlun pJoJxO

q1'

6007,'

Z.raluroq

tcldatSouqq

232

Bibliography

Ellis, N. C., R. Simpson-Vlach, and C. Maynard. 2008. 'Formulaic language in native and second language speakers: Psycholinguistics, corpus linguistics, and TESOL .' TES O L Quarterly 42 I 3: 37 5-96. Ellis, R. 2012. Language Tbaching MA: \Wiley-Blackwell.

Research and Language Pedagoglt.

Malden,

Ellis, R and G. Barkhuizen.2005. Analysing Learner Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ellis, R., S. Loewen, C. Elder, R. Erlam,J. Philp' and H. Reinders. 2009. Implicit and Explicit Knowledge in Second Language Learning: Testing and Teaching. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Erard, M.2012. Babel No More: Extraordinary Language Learners.

for the World's Most NewYork Free Press.

Tlte Search

Erlam, R. 2005. 'Language aptitude and its relationship to instructional effectiveness in second language acquisition.' Language Teaching Research 912:147-171. Ganschow, L. and R. L. Sparls .2001.'Learning difficulties and foreign language learning: A review of research and instruction.' Language Tbaching

3412:79-98. Gardner, D.2004. 'Vocabulary input through extensive reading: A comparison ofwords found in children's narrative and expository reading materials.' Applied Linguistics 251

l: l-37

.

Gardner, H.1993. Muhiple Intelligences: The Theorlt in Practice. NewYork: Basic Books.

Gardner, R. C. andW. E. Lambert.lg72.Attitud.es andMotiuation in Second Language Learning. Rowle¡ MA: Newbury House. 1982. 'From theory to practice' in M. Hines and Rutherford (eds.): OnTESOL '81' \Washington, DC: TESOL.

Gass, S. 'W'.

M.

pp.129-139. 198S. 'Integrating research areas: A framework for second language studies.' Applied Linguistics9I2: l9B-217 Gass, S.

M.

Gass, S.

M.1997. Input, Interaction, and the Second Language Learner.

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum andAssociates.

Gatbonton, E. and N. Segalowitz. 1988. 'Creative automatization: Principles for promoting fuencywithin a communicative framework.' TE S O L Quarterly 22 I 3 : 47 3-9 2. Gatbonton, E. and N. Segalowitz.2005- 'Rethinking communicative language teaching: A focus on access to fuenry.' Canadian Modzrn Language Reuiew 6l I 3: 325-53.

Ee7,

'lI8.

16Z 'dd'ssar¿

&rs;a,rru¡ qS.rnqurpE :q8rnqurpE' a&an8uapatu¡ : ('spa) ue,l\oH'V pue 'radrr3 'J 'sar^Eq 'y ul ,Sulqcear a8enSue¡ puores JoJ suorleorldur su pur sluapnls uorsreurur3o a8en8ue¡ralur aql, '786I 'ur-B¡as'I I pue 'g'fal¡eH 'rzL-991'dd 'ssa,r¿ Ársrar'ru¡ a8prrqrue3 :aBprrqrue3'uotltunbtV a3an3uu7 puotag uoolssal) u! ru¿oi uo snrol:('spe) suErllr/N'Ipue lrq8nocl 'f ur ponrsrnbct ¿1 p¡gc Sunouro¡d ur $lset ruroJ-uo-snroJJo alor eql '866I 'g'fa¡.re¡¡ ' Lg-e,T,l :y ¡yy &utu"rta7 a7un&uaT ,'a8en8ue¡ puof,as ¿ ur uonf,nJlsur uouezrlrreleJ ruo5 aluoppg ¿lerulxeru pur lruorraJlplun uolrez¡p;aua8 ¡euorreor¡dtul \,', GGI'¿ (uot¡ruru¡q

ulnn&ul

ot¡ t[s¿

'gg-I9T,te l0e wnas?ü ruo5 aruepl^E

to putnof,'s¡epuarod urerg petelar-lue

a

¿Sulssarord a8enSue¡-puoras ur rueJeJlp ErEI{1¡., 'I002 V '"t.I"H ta"ó rc SE¿,'s¡eluatu8aserdn 3o Sutqcear aqr ssarts llerurr¿, t7002'e'T'urIBH

' gZrcZ

:

7¡g

el¿Anoru or r{rr¿ase¿

g

r{1 t

at

s

:Ar¡ql8r¡arul pu¿ '

B- IZV

:

g

¡E1

r(au\ c1 t [s¿ a at sua opt dru o 3

,'lpnts,ftore.roldxe uy:a8en8uel puof,es e ul lrr¡qe uonercunuo¡d uo salers o8a ul sa8urqc pelnpul l¡¡eruaunredxa3o spagJ tqL,'ZL6I 'la ors'I pu¿'¡¡nC'f, (uouue.lg ¡'¡ureqq¡eH-rleg'g'V (Brorn)

' LL-g g : 1 ¡ 7V Qnuu"ó lO SE¿ ('uollelltour tuepnrs uo sar8at¿¡ts leuonrlrtoru Jo srraga agrSo uorreSllse^ul palualJo-ruooJsself, V sreurcal a8en8ue¡ Sunenlro¡/q,'

(xnueloilr-n3 g g g ¿'rafur g q' Z pue' ['W 's6-e8t:llzz

:

putnof¿7V[ ('urooJssel3 a8en8ue¡ a^Ile]IunulruoJ el{r ur JoIAeI{eq prnrlnl asauedef y:o1lr{Jo safa ag¡, '0002 "I'q (.rea.rg

Jo rolruoru

' gg-¡ : y ¡ 6 &urutra7 a8anSuzT ('stueuruJelep aldrr¡nu3o srsf¡eue-etaru y:qsr¡8ug ul uo¡llstnbce auagdroru Z'IJo t¿Pro (rap¡eurlrsPlog IErntBu agr Surure¡dxg,' I 002'rasfayeq'W'U pu"'¡4J'f

quaav¿ lo

s1saqtutg

rrelrslrrl)'(I

'sser¿ &rs.ra,rru¡ :8pl-rqrue3 :e8prrqur 3'atuaplrt7 Suuutn?l' 9002' ('tPt) 'y' g (eesauag

y : aautaaT

a8anSuaT

c¡

s43uE

pue's.rapuneg'¡4J 7¡¡'lreaf -urloqPulf

'esnoH frnqrvra¡ 6I'{.'aeseuag

qroÁ,&\eN'sa&anSuaT om¿ qSnotr'p SututraT' Lg ' 0B- L9T,

:7

¡

97 SututaaT a&an&uoT

eyL,'9L6I g (aassuag

,'Sururea¡ a8en8ue¡ puoJas ut acua8q¡atulJo elor

'lIt-GgV :g ¡69 [1tuw"ó IOSE¿ .'uone8rtsa,rur rllsrn8urTol¡os y :frtrncJe uollelf,unuotd 71PuE uolr¿Ilge dno¡8 (rlrl^oruuor¡ tI "g'uoluoqrsg

f,rur{ra (sreureaT, 'E002

'pÉpw'I

I PuE

,ft,¡dru&ouqtg

234

Bibliography

Hatch, E.1978. 'Discourse analysis and second language acquisition in E. Hatch (ed.): Second Language Acquisition: A Book of Readizgs. Rowle¡ MA: Newbury. pp. 401-35. Heath, S. B. 1983.

rYays

uithWords. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Hedge,

T 2000. Tbaching and Learning

Oxford University

in

the Language Classroom.

Oxford:

Press.

Hoare, P. and S. Kong. 2008. 'Late immersion in Hong Kong: Still stressed but making progress?' in T \(4 Forrune and D. J. Tedick (eds.): Pathways to Muhi lingualism: Emerging Perspectiues on Immersion Educatioz. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. pp. 242-66.

Horst, M. 2005. 'Learning L2 vocabulary through extensive reading: A measurement study.' Canadian Modern Language Reuieu 6ll3:355-82.

Horwitz, E. K., M. B. Horwia,andJ. Cope. 1986. 'Foreign language class room anxiety.' M o d.e r n L anguage Jo urna I 7 0 I 2: | 25 -32. Howard, E. R.,J. Sugarman, D. Christian, K. Lindholm-Leary, and D. Rogers. 2007 . Guiding Principles for Dual Language Educatioru Znd edn. 'Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. http: //www. cal. org/twi/ guidingprinciples. htm Hu, M. and I. S. P. Nation. 2000. 'Unknown vocabulary density and reading comprehension.' Reading in a Foreign Language f3lL 403-30.

Hulstijn, J. and B. Laufer. 2001. 'Some empirical evidence for the involvement load hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition.' Language Learning

5rl3:539-58. HunterrJ. 2012. 'Small talk developing fuenc¡ accuracy, and complexity in speaking.' ELT Journal 661 l: 3041 Itard, J. -M. -G. Meredith.

1

9

62.

Th e Wi

ld B oy ofAu ey ro n (L'e nfant s auu age). N ew York:

Jarvis, S. andd Pavlenko. 2008. Crosslinguistic Influence in Language and Cognitio n. New

York Routledge.

Johnson, J. and E. Newport. 1989. 'Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of maturational state on the acquisition English as a Second Language.' Cognitiue Psychology

2llI:

of

60-99.

Johnson, R. K. 1997. 'The Hong Kong education system: Late immersion under stress' in R. K. Johnson and M. Swain (eds.): Immersion Education: International Perspectiuet Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

pp.17I-89.

9t.c

' g0SLgrz ig I L, SuxuwaT aSan&uaT (ao.oa1 .'Jorler{eq a8en8ue¡ u8laro3 pue'ssaua.re,re'uonuellv' L66I'¿'¿ '

:EpBuEJ

'oluo;ol

'salpnry

1t-C'

dd'sserd oluoroJ3o lrrsra.tru¡ ux uoxwrn?g a7un8uaT puotag

prrydruE :apauaS

qrua.ti:('pa) uqdq 'S ur (tuaula alqle pue sepntruv:slapou qruer{ aro3 rceduoc3o fpnrs esEJ, '866I 'fa¡re¡¡ 'g pue 'treH 'O "S'u[xdBT 'ssar¿ a&an&uaT

llsra,r.run pJoJxO :proJxo '&ututaa7

puotag puo ttoaql f¿nxlnropos 'OO0Z '('pr) U '[ ]¡orue1 Lrnqr'ra¡ :y¡n¡ fay'ro¡' rya ruua dxE ua q rup7'8 a qL IN.lraqruuT

:uatp11q3to uoxflrn?g pn3u71!g 'lL6I.n>1prnL.U .5l pue .g

'rzz-1il'dd 'salerrossv pur urneglrg afuer^\¿T

:[¡

'qe.aa.ge¡,1 'luautdoprtag

ppos ?ua

tg s7n3u77 to sua dsV : utsq an&u u r g p o o t/?/ ! eD : ('spa) uosuorev' C ' a nuru&o pur'llp¿ 'tr ü 1eads

: ¡ E 6 putnof aSan&uaT uD? oW ('uollf, aJJof, JoJJa PUE uollf, nJ]sul ¡ ¡etutue¡8 rnoqe sJeIIaq (srauJ"el a8enSuz¡ Puores, '6002'uarl3 X

l-l 6

(uqy'g'usrr¡ns¡u¡e¡'y'uosduroqt .y'Iaü U'n'S "S rua,raeol

pue

'9t-99s |il06 putnof

a&an&u?7

ufipory ('sseualllf,eJa PuE'sseullclTdxa'scrlsualceleqc '9002'dlqd'[PuB'5 (uaaleol

Z'I qsr¡8ug rlnPe eqt uI slsere¡,

:sself,

,QdatSouqry

238

Bibliography

Maclntyre, P, 1995. 'How does anxiety affect second language learning? A reply to Sparks and Gansch ow.' Modern Language Journal7g l I: 90-9 . Macke¡ A.1999. 'Input, interaction and second language development: An empirical study of question formation in ESL.' Studies in Second Language Acquisition 2ll4: 557-87 .

d

and J. Goo. 2007 .'Interaction research in SLA: A metaanalysis and research synthesis.' in A. Mackey (ed.): Conuersational

Mackey,

Interaction in Second Language Acquisition: A Series of Empirical Studies. Oxford: Oxford Universiry Press. pp. 407-452.

d

andJ. Philp. 1998. 'Conversational interaction and second language development: Recasts, responses and red herrings.' Modern Mackeyr

Language Journal 821 3:

338-56.

S. M. Gass, and K. McDonough. 2000. 'How do learners perceive interactional feedback?' Studies in Second Language Acquisition

Macke¡ A.,

2214:471497. Mac-Whinn ey, B. 1997 .'Second language acquisition and the competition model' in A. M. B. de Groot and J. F. Kroll (eds.): Tutoriak in Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Perspectiu¿s. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates. pp. 113-44.

MacWhinney, B. 2000. The C H ILDES Proj ect: Tbo k for Analyzing Tdlh (zvolumes). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum andAssociates. http: //childes.psy. cmu. edu/

MasgoretrA. M. and R. C. Gardnen2003, Attitudes, motivation, and second language learning: A meta-analysis of studies conducted by Gardner and associat es.' Language Learning 531

l:

123-63

.

McCormick, D. E. and R. Donato. 2000. 'Teacher questions as scaffolded assistance in an ESL classroom' in J. K. Hall and L. Verplaetse (eds.): Second and Foreign Langaage Learning through Classroom Interaction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates. pp. 183-201,.

McDonough, K. 2004.'Learner-learner interaction during pair and small Broup activities in a Thai EFL context.' System 32:207-24.

Mclaughlin, B. 1987. Tlteories of Second

Language Learning. London:

Edwardfunold.

Mclaughlin, B. 1990. 'Restructuring.' Applied Linguistics 11/1: I 13-28. Meara, P. M. 19S0. 'Vocabulary acquisition: A neglected aspect of language learning.' Language Tbaching and Linguistics Abstracts 13:22146. P. M. 2005. 'Designing vocabulary tests for English, Spanish and other languages' in C. Butler, M. dos Angeles Gómez-Gonzales, and

Meara,

6€,7

'c

lroÁ^/\aN 'ruoo$sq)

'08-6E

I

Tig/7sl

aW ut sa{ag&uru.r?a7';GGI

'dd 'suru¡eluag ugof :ureprelsurv '&ututua7

PUE

aluraH

'('pt) '['plaU

aSan&uaT

paunttsu¡

pua satuaufie pn?x(tx?uJ:('pa) uosurqo¿ A ul ruoorssel3 elll¿f,Iunultuof a8en8uz¡ ,sreurealJo elor aql, 'Z0OT,'-l (¿lrre¿ aqr ur

órtqe orrl¡zue

'tl7-l6l igl6Z sruauor1¿to lautnof (?\el^er V izaue uI luef,f,e u8raroj3o aa:3ap Suncage srorf,EC, '1gg¿ 'eta¡g 'g '[ pue ',fuyce¡41 'V 'U 'I 'I 'otlsld 'r/rc-rce 'dd 'suruefuag uqof :ruepraruy '&urutaa7 qtaadg a3un3ua7 puoras u! atuauadxE aSan&uuT:('spa) orunry 'ntr pue uqog 'O ur ,uoorss¿lc a8en8ue¡ 'g saruef3o suonecl¡duI,' L00Z I'e{sld u8raro3 aqr ro; r{f,ftaser

s

a8alg

' IIEH -ef, nuar¿ /lllrrel¡l : [¡ 5a,rr¡¡ alppes .radd¡ 'up¿ qtrz sfiaÁpoqrs ?up aruoH aql SututaaT pua aSan&uaT '9007,'L'rad¡¿

'rnour,tof'aoer g'tJnof, JeH qroÁ ./rcN rúasa g apnlg dV a7an&ua7 rn7 sut¿ a tll' Gl ¿'rne¡sru¡¿ 99

'

ue

erz- Ll', iZ | 0

I

u oxtx sxn

btV a&an&u?T ?u

or aS

ur taryus llEqpaal a nrerror ualrrJ,r\ puB IEroJo srf,aJe IErruoraJICI,

'00t-€,9Tt8,18 c¡uaasa¿ &u1r,paa¿ a7an&u?1 ?uoJas,'s8uutas leuonf,nJlsur

a^nrf,runruruoc ul a>prdn

'6L-g9I :Zlgl

JauJEel pue >lleqpaeJ

ssoJf,E sruooJSSEIf,

a uf,arro3, '9002 f,(ueaqs

uoxixsxnbty a3an3u?7 ?uoras ux sax?nts ('sesrq lef,rreroeql

:V-IS parlnrlsul ur luaruaf,uer{ua rndu1,

'e66I'W'qr¡u¡S poo¡arurls

,ft1dru&ouqry

244

Bibliography Spada, N. and P. M. Lightbovm. 1999. 'Instruction, Ll infuence and developmental readiness in second language acquisition.' Modern Language

JournalS3ll: I-22. Spada, N. and P. M. Lightbown. 2002.'Ll andL2 in the education of Inuit children in northern Quebec: Abilities and perceptions.' Langtage and Education 161 3: 21240. Spada, N. andY. Tomita. 2010. 'Interactions between type of instruction and rype of language feature : A meta-analysis.' Language Learning

6012:146. Spada, N., P. M. Lightbown, andJ. L.'White. 2005.'The importance of form/meaning mappings in explicit form-focussed instruction in A. Housen and M. Pierrard (eds.): Inuestigations in Instructed Second Language Acquisition. Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 199-234. Spada, N. andM. Santos Lima. 2010. 'EFL and ESL teacher and learner views about integrated and isolated form-focused instruction.' Proceedings of the IX International Conference of the Brazilian Association of Canadian Studies: Porto Alegre, Brazil.

Spada, N., K. Barkaoui, C. Peters, M. So, and d Valeo ,2009. 'Developing a questionnaire to measure learners' preferences for isolated and integrated form-focused instruction.' System, 37 I I : 7 0-Bl. Spada, N., L.Jessop,\ü[. Suzuki,Y. Tomita, anddValeo. 2009. The Contributions of Isolated and Integrated Form-Focused Instruction on DifferentAspects of L2 Knowledge and Use. Paper presented at the American Association for Applied Linguistics: Denver, CO.

Spielmann, G. and M. J. Radnofslcy. 2001. 'Learning language under tension: New directions from a qualitative study.' Mod.ern LanguageJournal

8512:259-78. Storch, N. 2002. 'Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work.' Language

Learning52lI: ll9-58. Swain, M. 1985. 'Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development' in S. Gass and C. Madden (eds.): Input in Second Language Acquisition.

Rowle¡ MA: Newbury House. pp. 235-53. Swain, M. 198S. 'Manipulating and complementing content teaching to maximize second language learning.' TESL Canada Journal 6 I l: 68-83. Swain, M. 2000. 'The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue'inJ. P. Lantolf (ed.): Sociocubural Theory and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Oxford Universiry Press. pp. 94-114.

svz

'Ir-gZZ ;ZltI uorlxsxnbty a3un3ua7 ?uoras w tax?us ,.Sursseoord rndul pue uonf,nrlsur u:l¡dxg, '€66I .ourrlpuC .I pu" .g .uenu¿uu¡ 'Ig,-9'dd 'saterf,ossvpue tunrglrg aruer^l.E I

:[¡

'qenqeyr¡ 'tta1uaruruo7 ?up 'tfr?asay 'ttoaql :uotltntlsu¡ Suxstarot¿ ,VIS ul Sulssaco¡d lndu1, 'rz001.g6ua$e¿ue¡

:('pe) uarre¿ur¡'g

q

'6e-609 tvtr€ uotUvnbtV a&un&uaT puotag

ux

sax?us,'ruerSord Surprar pue Suluers¡ e ul

uoIlBIf, unuo ñ 71 3o ruaurdolartap aql :a3nf,Brd paseq-uolsuaga;duo3, '599¿'tuo5'H PuE'¡alPH'H "lI (u¡üogrqSn'W u'a'qc¡,rougo.r¡

paqddy;Bu,urudprorn,ü-,p;lli;Í!i"ii?::':(:3:#í puof,es pue a^ntu ur Surssaro¡d proru.-ua>1ods,

'1002 ¿ (qcr,rourgo.r¡ '1207-IBI:T,l9I

uotlrsmbty aSan&uaT puotag ry saryus ('ruooJsstlr a8enSue¡ puoles eql u¡ uorldruaard pue eruepl^a e rlrsod, '866I 'erlrltf,'-I pu?'I4I'fe{BJI

?u" tuotrylav ppos I I I Z6g6Z

3o

I

L08 I

lrrsra,lru¡

'sJeuBW ¡rn8ur¡rr¡n¡rr¿ :uopJ ,(rytuap¡ :lootps

w

al3 zJxpl¿¿

qsnSuE Sututpa7 ' o00z

utoo"tsspl)

1¡

.faqoo¡

3pd'srsaqr-qr{d-90 I 1 6¿-olnse¡-etltuoJ /ueensrlg/ef, 'otuororn dre.rgrT'arrdsr¡¡:sdrrq'otuorol paqsl¡qndu¡ 'uorleJrunrutuo3 Z'I ur tuawtsalul

'srsaqr

reurca'I :uorrrnrtsul pasnroC-rrrrogJo alo¡ '

9

erll 'I

6-egT

:Y

1g¿ ¡

E

¡tr¡tuo¡

ruu7 un3u11 1g

puy uotprnpg pn&ufllg,'oeqan| f,nf,rv ur asn put ÁUq" aSen8ue¡ pa,uarrad;o suralled, 'ggg¿'au¡dl\frry'T pue (uo.ru3'I I "C'.ro¡fu¡ 'ssar¿ &rs.ra,uun proJxo :proJxo z&un&ua7 uutuaT &uuo1d*E '6OOZ 'ulqzral¡as 'g pue 'g (auore¡

'8Lt-99r pumof

t7,t6L

a8un&u?7 uD?oW ('sruooJsselJ uorsJarurur ul asn a8en8utl-puof,as

uo a.r.¡t:eds¡ad rrrsrn8ul¡orf,os

V '166I 'u¡e,ras'I

'g (euo.re¡

I pue

'sraDEW ¡enSunr¡nyr¡ p Iolslr g' sa ru1 atn¡¡ t¡&n oil/ I u o x n? o"tl uI uV : u o uw np E a8a n&upT ? u o r a S pua ttoaql prrulwoxros'0I02 'ueruu¡ars'T pue (reauurv U "I tr'ur-E¡as :

'

r0e-987, :r-c I Le qrwatau lyuott?rn?fl

to putnof puzxlnu#lul ('uoItEInuJoJa¡ ol asuodsal (sJauJeal uolsJauruJl r{ruerC orn¿:q8norgr u 8uq¡e¡, '7,007,'undtl1''S pue'¡r\¡ rure,rg

'9t-gtt, :E ¡7g putnof

a7un&uaT ura?ory

raqtaSot 8uq¡ozvt sluepnts uorsJeruurr rlJueJC luaJselope ozvt¡ :Sulurea¡ , e8enSuq puoras pur uonrtretul '866I 'u¡rydu1'S pue'I ['u¡u¡as ,ft1dat&ouqq

246

Bibliography

VanPatten, B. andJ.tülilliams (eds.). 2007. Theories in Second Ldnguage Acquisition: An Introduction.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates.

Vygotslry, L. S. 1978. Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 'Wajnryb, R.1992. Classroom ObseruationTashs: A Resource Boohfor Language Teac h ers and Trainers. Cambridge: Cambridge Universiry Press. 'W'alker, R. 2010. Tbaching the Pronunciation of English as a Lingua Franca.

Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

Vatson-Gegeo, K. L 1992. 'Thick explanation in the ethnographic study of child socialization: A longitudinal study of the problem of schooling for Kwara ae (Solomon Islands) children' in \í. A. Corsaro and P. J. Miller (eds.): Interpretiue Approaches to Childreni Socialization. Special issue of New Directionsfor Child Deuelopment 58: 5l-66. Werker, J. E, W'. M. W'eikum, and K. A. Yoshida. 2006. 'Bilingual speech processing in infants and adults' in P. McCardle and E. Hoff(eds.): Childhood Bilingualism: Research on Infancy through School Age. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. pp. 1-l B. Wesche, M. B. 1981. 'Language aptitude measures in streaming, matching students with methods, and diagnosis of learning problems' in K. Diller (ed.): Indiuidual Dffirences and Uniuersals in Language LearningAptitude. Rowle¡ MA: Newbury House. pp. 119*39. rü7hite, J. 1998. 'Getting the learners' attention: A rypographical input enhancement study' in C. Doughry and J. \Williams (eds.): Focus on Form in Classroom

SIA. Cambridge: Cambridge Universiry

Press.

pp. 85-113.

White,J. 2008. 'speeding up acquisition of his/her. Explicit LllL2 contrasts help'inJ. Philp, R. Oliver, andA. Mackey (eds.): Second Language Acquisition and the Younger Learner: Child's PlayiAmsterdam: John Benjamins. pp. 193-228.

'White,J. and

P.

M. Lightbown.l9B4. 'fuking and answering in ESL

classes.' Canadian Modern Language Reuiew 4012:228-44.

White, L.1987. Against comprehensible input: the input hypothesis and the development of L2 competence .' Applied Llnguistics B: 95-110. \ü7hite

L. 1989. Uniuersal Grammar

and Second LanguageAcquisition.

Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

White, L. 1991. Adverb placement in second language acquisition: Some effects of positive and negative evidence in the classroom.' Second Language Research T 12: 133-61 .

L'Z

' lB-09 I tZ I 9 uoxtcxnbtV aSan&uaT ?uoras ux sar?as,'srualsls a8en8uel;arul pue a8uegc orrsrn8utljo lapour e^r.^a aql 'rg6l'g''lquz '

Lt-er/

:1

¡

gg SututaaT a8an&uuT ,'uollrsrnbce Z-I uo

aruangur 113o lrr,rrnalas ptuaudola^aP PuE IEruroJ eq1. '086I 'ssar¿

'1¡'lqvz

llsra,uun proJxo :proJxo 'yooqpupH

,¿aqrpal úalnqaco¡ V :a7papouy

(uerurevrurq ?toA 'G007, 'g '3 '9t-6tS :V¡gy8uru.raa7

aSan&uaT ('aloJ a^nJEJaruI pue bualcgo-rd3o lf,age erT, :uoIlJEJelut. Z-I ur slrrguor lelruaraJar 8ut,rlosa¡, '066I 'PPuoPf,tI J'(I Pu¿'g'eInL

'OI-71Z i, 6€ arxiror¿ otut [.roaq1 (¿peuraruor |

eq srotef,npe

ppoqs

:sa8en8ue¡ fpuegSo sso-I, '0002

'T (arourllld Euo4(\

'BZ-71T 'dd 'ssar¿ rrruapef,V :>lroÁ.^aeN uotn?qag a8anSuaT pua [.t117qy a&rn&uaT ux sarua¿agxe pnru(tryul :('spa) ra¡drua;¡ 'CI ¡otttsnbce

pue '3ue7¡, Á'S-'lA.'arourlll{

a8enSue¡ puof,es ur seruaraglp lBnpr^rpul

qro

'['J tl

,'6L61'1

(a.rourfiIü tuo4(l

're-|rz'dd'e Le 'uotvunbtya&an&uaT

./deN satuanglo [wapacV 4"to¡ ma¡¡ arpto slpuuv uStato¿ pua aSan&uuT aa1ta¡¡ :('pe) alurlN'H u_l ,uoplslnbce a8rn8ue¡ Jo 1nrarl

pagrun V :spsralrun ¡euotttsmbce a8en8uel, 'I 86I 'H '"Por1(\ rcI'dd'asno¡1 l.rnqrc¡ :y¡t¡'falzu,o¡ '

n-

s&uryaa¿lo 4oog V:uoxtrcmbtyaSan&u?7 ?uoras:('pa) rpe¡1 'ntr 'E ul .uonrsrnbce Z'I f,rlsrprnlru uI seruanbas ¡eruarudola^aq,' g L(rI'¡¿.'"Po¿S.

'T,e-gr,tilzl sutnn&utT pa!1 ddy,' uor.tr.slnbce 71 u,(tentre rlt¡eluls Pue tueuaf, uel{ua (upeds'N rndu1, 'I66I '¿tuEU'T pue'ulogrq8¡1'¡4J ¿ ''T'allrld(\ ólsre.tru¡ a8p¡rqrue3 :a8puqrue3 'ssar¿

t?ururug ps¿aaxul) ?uv

(arF[¿C\ uoxlxsxnbcV a8an&ua7 ?uoras '8.007,'1

[qdat3o71qq

6-96 se?en?uel puof,es ur uorlrnrlsur pue üÉ-l uortrsrnb:¿ a8enSuel p¡q:

Ztn' L-92 qraads parrarrp-p¡rqc

i"hr stserarSo uoneta.rd:atur pue

9z (saa'IIHI) urarsls eSuBr{f,xg ¿l¿C agengu¿'I pilr{J

ü€-f uonrsmb¡¿ a8en8uel p¡rgc sf,nslJelf,¿J"r{f,

Jeuftel 2at sJeuJ"al Jo sf,JlsrJelf,?J?r{f, lndur peUrporu lgreads parca.rrp-plJrp rrr lIEt re{?teref,

z-rf

a8enSuzl rrruopef,"

(&uarcyo.rd

r

nruSof,)

dTVJ

31rc'€tt 8u¡8erur

frr

9St '96

\Lt

z-r€ (s¡rrs

os1u aas

?€rc usrrnor Er{ag aruEplo^E

rlmulpJo)

ruolarreg

96 realord .rorre¿ a8y (sarnrEeJ

osla aas

9-(.6'lg

r saunosa;

*".lrJ;lir,"

nurce¡¡o

grar'pe

srau.rea¡ tuerselope

z--oet stdr¡rsu¿¡t uoDf,Elatur tuapnts-JJq3eal zr-nz uorurdo ¡nol r¡oddns roz suotutdo ¡nol .¡tLana.¡ L_SL

a¡uauadxo Sulurea¡ a8en8ue¡ uo tf,3gel 66 ssac¡ns Surureel a8en8url pue satruaraglP PnPplPu¡ uo rf,euar ü-€ Sulu;ra1 ua."a."¿;

eSen'uel rnoqe

sr

Surg:ar qlr^{ sanrlrlf,¿ ro3 uonen

;:.'.:".tT* ¡errSo8epad

qoeru

o'au ," 1oo¡ =Í:í',,'x#ií:t lf^oq Sururea¡

eJualuas ot P"al sanf, ,,rrrrJ¡p

6-3or Anperuorne

srauea¡,lrolpne

| -ft e?enBuq :aurea¡ asl¡eue

Srzz'6gr o

9--26

a3e

a8en8ue¡ pue Suruonrury

l-ül,r uorsraurur ¡enp rf Sulgcl.tr.s apoc 9 uoltrsmbf,? a8en8ue¡ p¡rqc €-o€ rusrTenSurlg pooqpp{l 3ürz rusl¡en8urtlq serurue¡8o¡d uonef,npe IEnBulIq

'l'

Ég

e8enSur¡ puof,rs roJ sueluoJ a.ro¡dxa l,or ¡epo¡4¡ rorluotrAl ar{t eurüexe s¡xatuoo 3ururca¡ e¡¿druo¡ suonsanb,s;aureal asl¡eue

l-üzr

z-rl

B €rc' s 9rt","rrl',. itjlil]i 31rc'lSt qf,r?eser uonf,"

'LLr 'lrr srsaqrodlq 8ur¡nou 6_s

'f6 sreur"al rlnpe

9or srsaqrodfil ratlg e^ntraJr 9Or ltraJ3

Sgr'l9t'6-9l ruatuareld

L-92 u onte tatur p¡q>-rlnpe lrraqnd

?trc'i.l ursqen8urnq a plpp? 6-g rsar ,8mr, aqr rno,{.rr

UI?Jq €9 spro.u,pe,v\orroq,

31rc

uoDe)runu¡rrroc Teuos:ed;arur rlspq) SlIg olt't--o6 srrureel Jo sJaIIsq

t-(.ot

'LS 8u1u:ea¡ a8enSue¡ puores ur

6r-ir

uolrrsrnbce a8en8ur¡ rs;g ur qreordde

pn8urlolpne 8(

6oz s¡erreteur f,lruar{rne

?Ítz' 9 uopeuyulrrsrp,Gor¡pne 31.rc'S6t ' 6-lSt'lot'99 qreordde ¡en8urrorpnr g*l,g .sraurea¡ (sapntnr?

'l-tgr

Sltz'l6t'9or sseqrodfg

SurureolTuonrsmbce

Bltz 'g-9t rap:o óe;ncce

IBltuassa Jo

9or'ror 'oor '98 'lg óaxue (15y) a8en8uq u8rg uerr.reury lg uonenunuo.rd uo toage 'lor{ol1e

Sltz'

9-ll (sq:a,r3o) rcadse L--og' gL Surureal e8en8ue¡'apnrrrdr

rgr'l-il

lqrre.rarq lr¡¡qrssacce

Lrr (sruoru8a5 qcaadg

slxaluo] 3^r]¿f,runluu¡o] ur uopuzwruolnv)

B€rc '€z

16'o6'tL'oL-69

SSEIIV

a3enBuel puof,es ur 'lueroe

'Jrqrunu aSed aql .rag.e .3, lg ur'toqs ere sornue lrrssolS

XECINI

250

Index children first language 5-34

comprehension-based instruction ry9-r65,

second language 9z-9 choice motivation 87-8 chunks ro, fir, 2oz, zr4g

comprehension checks rr4

ztrg

see also

formulaic

content-based language teaching (CBLT) zr5g see also immersion programmes content and language-integrated learning

language

clarification requ€sts rr4, r4o, r88 classrooms

classroom instruction and individual differences 9z-6 classroom learning 39 classroom observation schemes iz9-49, 214g

and learning pragmatics 67-8 methods of teaching and learning 153-99 motivation in the classroom 88-9 closed questions r47

co-construction Ir9 code switching 3r cognates 61, zr4g cognitive development, and the interactionist perspective 24-t cognitive linguistics z8-9, rro-rr, rr3-r8 cognitive maturity 37-8, zt4g cognitive psychology ro8-r8 collaboration collabo¡ative dialogues rt9, t89, zr4g collaborative interaction r68 see a lso learner-learner interactions;

CLIL (content and language-integrated

ztjg

CLI

(communicative language teaching) zrSg and aptitude testing 8o compared to structure-based inst¡uction r56-7 and phonolory 68 and pragmatics 67

reacher-student

i

n

(CLIL) ryZ, r7r,2rrg focus on usage r24, 127-9,2rt_ll 'get two for one' r7t-7 and increasing the time available for language study r48 learning verb forms in science class r88 and pragmatics 67 and recasts (not noticing) r4r Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (C,AH)

41-t, 47, 57, 68, ro4, zr5g control groups rj7, 2rjg corpus linguistics 72, zoz, zt6g corrective feedback z169

see

also

recxts

clarification requests r4o contextual importance r43 effect on oral production r94 elicitation r4r error correction in communicarive instructional settings r27-8 explicit correction t4o, zo8, zro-rt and first ianguage acquisition zoz-3

and'get it right in the end'r8z-95

pair work communicative confidence 86 learning) r47, t7r,

conditional mood r7o, r88 connectionism z8-9, zt5g

teraction transcripts

rj2-1

and the innatist perspective Io5 and the interaction hypothesis r67 learner beliefs about 9r metalinguistic feedback r4o-r, 41-4, rg-4 negative feedback in learner-learner interactions r7o, r7l positive reinforcement 14 repetition r4r self-correction vs other correction I94 srudying corrective feedback in the classroom r39-45

ofdisplay questions r4t-6 Communicative Orientation of language use

timing of corrective feedback r94 uptake

rl9,

14r, r4z, t88, zz4g

Teaching (COLI) rzq competence, linguistic vs communicative

written corrective feedback 144-5 correlation 77-8, z16g

t58-9, zr5g compedtion model rrr-r3 comprehensible input ro6, r65-7r and authentic materials zog, zrjg 'just listen ... and read' ry9-65 and modified interaction rr4 and the Monitor Model ro6-7

counterbalance hypothesis r43, z16g Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH) zz-4,

comprehensible output hypothesis 165, zr5g

Í4, rrg,

9z-6, z169 cross-cultural research, into fi¡st language

acquisition z6-9 crossJinguistic influence 59-6o, zt6g see also Contrxtive Analysis Hypothesis

(CAH) bi-directional 59-6o

t9z

(ügC)

Surqcear aSenSue¡ paseg

-lurtuof, :(Ill) Surqr¿er aSen8ue¡ a nef,runruruot osq aas SuynJru uo snroJ uollrnJlsul PJsnf,oJ-ruJoJ aat utJoJ uo snf,oJ

l,Í

z€ 3o uorrerardJelur ua>Ietsnü saqreordde rlnef runruruo:) ur l¡e¡nr¡e aro3aq Sulu;ea1

8rr ÁIf,It"tuotnE aas

l-iLr

uorsraruur ¡enp

Soz'git uonf,nlsur or qreordde

,paa3 drrp,

g-1.fi s¡up a¡lr¿-rd u¡olr¿d

9ir suonsanb le¡dsrp elrllup /rr saqreordde rsunor^eqaq pue g-Llr sJlpp uraled pnSur¡orpne

sE

lcuang )ruengur crlsrnSu¡-sson

o9-LS

31rc' 6-Slt'orr r,rorrrr.rl r"l5li! zg saSen8trel puoras Sulu;re1 ur

sa8en8ue¡ 3o sauau?A,rJ slf,eprp

lq paruangur loz'9Lt'SLt'fLt

o€-62 uorrrsrnb:e a8en8ue¡ rs-rg ut slelop ptre srrprosrp

Sururea¡ a8en8url puotres uo ef,uangur

09-61 (Duangur JusmSurl -sso:r) a8en8uel puoras

'L6'l--ze suonentrs tuer8runur ur r1 Jo lueuJdole eP PanuDuof Jo elwuodrur ,(1¡eteut? Jo uortrsrnbre

96t 'zg-LLt,e]qer{f,Ert LS-SV

zr-or

?Ln (a8en3uel raqlou 'r1) a3en3ue1 rs:g

lttrrrro3 rrr PBqPraJ

r{rÉr, pue

aSen8ue¡ puocas

sasnep

e nEIrrJo

uoDEurJoJ uoDsanb 69 uonenunuord L-99 scneut3etd

É-zl s¡au¡ru¡a¡ap

plrg

Surureal rurpuodap p¡agTtuapuadapq

r

sr t¿rl1y\

Álynut? uo¡trsmbr¿

l-ül

tt-\

a,uteu 'an8uol

3l,rz '€g sa/rs s?laleJ

olr IregPeeJ

a,rrssassod

6-9l'ot

uolt¿3au

l,-91 (ruaudo¡a.r.ap tuetua our

a8en8ue¡ puocas) g8norqr

puof,as uo aruangur a8en8uel rsrg

ztz' 6r a8paytr.ou¡ l¡rldxa

g-LSr'g-9t'6-1, saruaqd:our ¡eoneruuzr8 r--ogr 'L\ a8en8uel

9-üg uors;arronx:

É9 sareuSoc as¡e3 (.

3

Ltz'l-f3t

sarpnrs Teruaurrradxa

zt-9

3-Lg uorteallour a Dnf,axa 3

lzl

,(11etaua? uonrsmbf,? aSen8uel rs.rg

of-62 s(epp pu¿

sraprosrp

Ltz'tS-6tt fqde:Sougra

o6-69'rL'ol, uorrerlgre dnor8 rruqra otr uo >If,?qPreJ rarp"al zü s¡o¡.¡a p]ry1 ot J€purs Jp¿ru srolJe

sJauJsJ] a8en8uel puocas

g-LSr

adÁ uorrcn¡¡sur or Sulprof,re rueraglp 3

fl

ro.r.ra

ssarSo.rd3o uSrs e ag uer

9-lzr s8untas uonrsrnbrr a,urcads¡ad rs¡uop:erarur oz a,rlloads.rad tspeuur a¡l¡ads.rad rs¡rnor,reqaq

s¡o¡.ra ¡eruarudola,rep

39rc'lh

e

¡ernleu

z8 uoDf,nJlsur a Df,nPaP

Lz'tz nuand yap 1?

s

l1ilxl il:

srsar¡rodf¡1 polrrd TErnrrJ eqr pu?

uerPlrqrJ?rP

9rr AUg¿dBr Surssarord

papprqu¡a

Ég rsar sa.rnSg

srxrluof,'ISE

sarpnrs e,rndr:rsap

o€-62 ruaudola,rap a8en8ue¡ pa&¡ap 39tz '16r ' Ltt '6ot eSpa¡r"rou¡ r^u¿re]rrp

aqr pue

8-lz uo'f''J,,u,

Jr{r pue

rr{r put Éz

rwr.rodurr (aun) a.rnsodxaJo lunoure

39rc '99 (8 srrpnts puorlras-ssorl 69 uonenunuord pue

rndul 'tuaruuotrlua

uo¡rerlct1a

ggr'rh '16

Ltz' L Lt sarnl?{ ¡eruarudole,rap

li sanlre¡urs a8en8uel-sso-rc ?€tz 'S-tS lgrrc;arq Ár¡rgrssacce 3l,rz saruanbes Teruauldola,rap

fq

tpeotdde srslpue

orr'95'tt

gl 'lü óuen5ord tou 'of,uepro

or Jnp og deru sro:ra3o a3uJsqe >ll"qPaeJ a rDe.r.rof, os/p sJotJe 'as

l-iz 6r-ir

6-gtr'gzr'69 'gÉ

Ísruoorsself, osla aas aBen?u¿l

3Ln '€-z9r lueruecu?qua tndur/ rndur pof,u?r{ua (C'IE) ecuer3 en8ur¡ e se rlsrt8uE

r/

olr

'ICE

pw

9-Soz' 9gt't8r' l9r' LV'S-W 'zü ,sro:.ra, Sursner JáJsueJl a8en8ue¡ rsrg

9l-8t

sesnEll

aane¡er',tsed o¡ Jf,ueJaJar,'suonsenb 'sa¡ussassod'uo¡re8au3o tuauldola ep ¡urreJrp Surrragre saSenSw¡ tsrg

'6-96'16

Sururea¡ a8en8uel ro3 uzis l¡.reo

ogr sa8ets ¡eruarudo¡a,tap

pur

xa?uI

252

Ind.ex immersion programmes 79-80, r28, r4z, t7r,

and the behaviourist perspective r8-r9 and the competition model rrr 'get it right in the end' r8z-95 and lack ofaccvfacy

172-5,

rg,

negotiation for meaning u4, rz8, t3o, 165-6, zzrg and pronunciation 7o foreigner talk 39, zrTg Foreign tanguage Classroom Anxiety Scale

85

foreign language le:rr ning zt7 g

form-focused instruction zrSg see ako corrective feedback beneficial in content-based instruction r73 and'get it right in the end'r8z-95 useful in some circumstances 196-7 formulaic language ztSg see also chunks at early stages oflearning 56 and information-processing model ro9 much language learned as rrr in second language errors 44 and uh- questions 12 fossilization 43, t57, zrSg

fronting, question formation ry 49-5t, r78 function words 7, 43, ztSg gende¡ grammatical,29, 523, t87 'Geme'zz-3 generalisation 42, 44, ztSg genuine qu€stions ryo,45-9, ztSg gestural (sign) language z3 'get it right from the beginning'154-9,

t66, t95 'get it right in the end' r8z-95 'get two for one' r7r-7 grammar in babies'first utterances 7 grammatical gender 29,521, t87 gammadcality judgements 9i, 106, zrSg grammatical morphemes, child acquisition of 7-9, zr8g grammatical morphemes, second language acquisition of 46-8 learner beliefs about grammar instrucdon 9r obligatory contexts 46-8, t58, zzrg

grammar translation methods 8o, tz6, 154-9, r95,2r8g

grammaticality judgement 9j, 106, 2rg1 group work r7o,2o9 see also p^r wotk habits r4, ro4 human input, need for 6, z8 identiry 7o, 89-9o

imitation and first language acquisition rt-r9 and the behaviourist perspective r4-r9 and second languages 4i, zor-L

t87-g,2rgg

immigrants importance of continued development of Lr 3z-3, 97, r74, r75, 176, zo4 second language acquisition 79, 89-go, 94,9t' r7r implicit knowledge r93 individual differences 75-ror inductive instruction 8r-z information-processing model ro8-ro, zrgg

information questions (genuine questions) 13o, 145-9

inhibition 8+-t Initiation/Response/Evaluation (IRE) exchanges rz6 innatist perspecrive on child language acquisition 2o-4, ro4*7, zrgg

inprr zrgg

see

aáa comprehensible input;

modified input floodúz-1, zrgg arnount of exposure (time) important 38, 69, tz8, t48-9 enhanced input/input enhancement 16z-3 frequency ofencounters with new material is important 6z in the innatist perspective on child language acquisition zr

input flood t623, ztgg input hypothesis ro6 input processing rr6 the 'logical problem of second language acquisition ro5 structured input 8r-z

instruction (teaching) instruction 96-9 amount and distribution of time available age and second language

r48

'drip feed'vs intensive r48, zo5 explicit instruction and pragmatics 67-8 explicit instruction and pronunciation

70-r explicit instruction and vocabulary learning 64 and the innatist perspective ro5 instructed vs uninstructed learners 46-7 instructional programmes and aptitude profiles 8r instructional seftings rz4-9 see also classrooms

teachabiliry hypothesis r77-82

instrumental motivation 87, ztgg inregrated Form-focused instruction r9r integrative motivation 87, zrgg intelligence 79-80, zoj

€.sT,

8-18 8uru.real a?en8url puotros ur rlqerrel sB 6-99 sacrreerd leuone DouJ .s]Jqreal :otctpa:d t sle.,lrTe rou g-l,g uorrradsortal uoll?Aporu

ü-foz

ssamns 3o

8OZ UOIIfeJJOf,

e

gl, Surqcreasa.r ur

rSSaJxa PrrE

l,-ll, spoqrau qf,rersal I--O8I urBsl ol ssaurPsJJ 9-üg lrrTeuos-rad ü-€3 sa¡lrs Suru:ea¡ o

Lt't--o6

o9-61, aoua8rqerur uonErIStB dno;8 pue lrrruapl z6 uopcn.nsur ruooJsself, pue

6-Lg'oL uont rtoru pu? sepnrnte 9--26 e?e sf Dsrjetf,

6€ lTer :ar¡rear

9h't-lLr (ffg¡)

(fi))

l-fot

'(lptaua?

Sozz'69r (sE¡1) saposrda pare¡ar-a8rn8url

f-og apnrnde Sururral a8en8url af,uanuur onsrn8urT-sso¡r osTo aas 69 af,u"lsrp a8rn8uel oÉ-Gz lG-pp pu" srrprosrp a8en8uel s¡¡urnb¡s ¡eruarudo¡arlap aas

J¿pJo uorlrslnb:e aSen8uel Ig srau;ea¡ f,llaql$¿uDl

"'

uarsq rsnf, S9-6St ,ptu pue r6r uontrnJlsul pJsnroJ-rüJoJ pJtelosr Loz 'og-gL (rua¡ronb arueSqerur)

|¡

o6-69 (8uru.real ur;eurea¡3o) turunsr ur f:e1nqe:or' leuon?uralur iz,saerdope leuou¿uJelul, É9

uoDf,eJatur rrs slotnf, ollalur 9-19 sorreruSe.rd a8rn8uel.rarur g-1,fi puruurSaq aqr tuo{ tq3¡.r u ra8, pue

ft,\¡enua?

Lrcnurru

Sozz a8en8uel.rarur Jf,

uJnuur trltsFSuJl-ssoJf ,rJ af,uaJeJJalur 61, Surgr.reasa; uagr'r'

tunof,f,E otu¡ Sunras prf,os J>l"r ol paau rndur pagrpou rrr uonreretur pegporu 6oz '

'oL-69t '6-Stt

gzt' 6tt suonf,?laluI JauJEal*JauJEa]

'''

'ar'n¡ads¡ad Teruarudo¡a,rap /tsruorpeJatur

36rz'ol-69t

'L9t 'S9t 'grr 'frr slsagrodfq uonr?raur

g-lz

uonlsmbce

a8en8uel tsJg ur uorltrpJetu¡3o arueuodur üonf,?Jalur l¿uo]t"sJa uof,

tL-S9t'tu

6gt'6u sanSoplp a neroq?ilor

uollf,?Jelut

Soz'gtt

Suturea¡ Sururea¡

6-S€t' gzt'6rr suorDe¡elul lauJ€el-rauleal

ElErlf JeuJ¿e]

Lz ¡t or.lYzr.lzrt os a8enSue¡,

aas

rauSraroS

Lrc' É-z9t lndul pef,u?I{ua

g-Lzr

o8

rsa¡ apnrrrdy a8en8uel u:apoy4¡ aas

s,r

l9-6fi sagerordde uatsrl tsnl, urJo >pEI uonrsrnbr¿ a8enSuel p¡qr

.ppar pue

l-üz

ü-€ot uonezr¡oruaru

rql pu" Bozz

serpnrs Teurpnrr8uo¡

uorr¡s¡nbcz

oü-gf suorrrpuor

sJarleg JauJ?al

€-og apnrnde Suru.rea¡ a8en8ue¡

senprlglp

o6-69'oL :3eneue¡ r' g rrr rr',a,:otrtTrlil:il 3rc2' g-91' 6-L lnnevsusu.rS'satuaqd:ou gtt' L-9ot (r+ z) ¡apo¡l¡ rotluory

g-Ll

S9r'6lr 'lrr rndtno paglpotü rndul pegrporu :I*qpaal a ltrarrol Sozz'lrr uon¡¿¡alur paypouJ oqa

ürr lndul a¡g¡suaqarduroo pue 9zr s8urlas uoDrs¡nbor pJnt?u ur rndur pegrporu :Ireqpaal r ntrarrof, Sozz'irr uonc¿¡elul pegporu ol,r suoD¡e¡atur JeuJeel-Jeuleel ur os1a aas

?Lrc'6ln¡u 3

Surqrear e8en8uel peseq-tuetuof, ur Surgeuar a8en8ue¡ a ltsf,runruruoJ ur rpeads por)arrp-plql

L1z

g-Loz 1o slyeueq Sozz lndur pegryoru

OVtru)

Sozz'L9'99 uorre8ruu uonetrurr oqa

€r s.ra¡ooqcs-a.rd ur

gf s;aureal replo pue

t-egt'

Étt'r--oür ¡reqpaaS rnsrn8utptaur r€ usr¡en8urtrg pue Sozz sseue¡e¡tte r¡rs¡n8u¡Teraru Sozz' e6t srsf ¡euu-erau r--og lrreedtr l¡ou¡au¡ 8ur¡.lo¡'t ol, spro.,'r rtlau 3ur¡at.¡la¡

or-6or ¡aporu Surssacord uoneruro3ur

,Gouatu Sulueau uo snf,oJrrs uo sn3oJ'Surueau

'6h'96 '65'gg '6'g-1,

rl, se qsrfug 'ecuer3 rn8urt rl,-f9r ¡Ter s,re1,

t6r'9ot

6oz'oL-L9t '

sloporu uonf,nJrsul ,paal drrp, srr, alrsuelul 36rz 'z9r'8trISE a rsualur rL uoner¡unuo.rd3o ¡eo8 se'ft¡rqr8rqarul

xzpul

254

Index Motivation Orientation of Language Teaching

(MOLT)

88

multicompetence (as better goal than native abiliry) 96

multiple intelligences 8o nadve language sra first language narive-like abiliry 68, 7r, 96, zzrg native speaker J, 24, 42, 5t, 67, 69, 96, 97, u4, 126, t4S, zzrg natural acquisition settings rz3-9 natural order hypothesis ro6, zxg developmental sequences

7t, 94,

see also

negation child acquisition of 9-ro second language learning 48-9 negat¡ve feedback ¡¿r clarification requests:

possessive determiners

46-8, 521,

163

power relationships 7o, 89 Practice and the behaviourist perspective r4-r9 and cognitive perspectiv€s rr7 pragmatics zzzg importance of lear ning zo7 interlanguage pragmadcs 6t-6

polite pronouns ry3, t87 registers (different language for different situations) 4, ry3, t87, zzzg and second language learning 65-8 pre-school years, and language acquisition

t2-r3

corrective feedback

negotiation for meaning il4, r28, Vo, t6j-6, 2218

negotiation of form r19, zztg see also form-focused instruction neurological research rr3 noticing hypothesis ttj, r77, t83-4, r89, zzrg object pronouns 164 obligatory contexts 46-8, r58, zztg observation

private speech fi8 ) r4z, 2zzg procedural knowledge rc9, rr7, ry3, zzzg processabiliry theory t6-r7, r77, t8z, zzzg processing capacity rt6 processing instrucdon ú2, 164-5, zzzg

proficiency and bilingualism 3r-z difHculties in researching 78-9 learner language and proficiency level

r67-8

ethnography r49-5r observation schemes rz9-48 open quesdons r47 order of acquis ition zztg see developmental sequences

overgeneralization errors zzrg and the behaviourist perspective r8-I9 in first language acquisition rz and the information processing model

psychological theories see behaviourism; information processing model

lo

past tense 55-6, r73

pattern practice drills ry7-8, zztg patterns in language, learning r8

t9

see also

learner-learner i nteractions perception ofsounds 69, 7o perceptually-based learning styles 83 performance rz, 4j,7r,79,8j,94, 96, ro7, rt7, 186, zztg personal characteristics of learners see Iearner characteristics personaliry 84-6

phonemic distincdons zzzg infants' abiliry 6 second language learners 69

Prompts clarification Íequests rr4, r4o, r88 elicitation r4r, r88 encouraging self-correction ú8-9, 194

pronunciation 68-7r

in pronunciation 68-9 in second language learning generally 44 pair work 168-9, r7o, zo9 paraphrasing lr4, r47 see abo recxts parent-child interaction z6-7

peer group, learning from

phonology 68-7r, zo6 polyglot savant 8l positive reinforcement r4

puberty 94-5 questions

child acquisition of ro-rz,

19

display questions r3o second language learning 49-jt, t8o teacher questioning in the classroom 145-9 rate oflearning 96,97, zzzg readiness to learn r8o-r reading efFect ofliteracy on first language

development r3 'just listen ... and read' ry9-65 and practice n7 problems in learning to read z9-3o reading as a source ofvocabulary growth

61-4, zo6 reading material for learners 16r-z fecasts 2229

comparison offeedback that corrects vs PromPts r94

in content-based classrooms 139-45

s97,

6-glt' gzr' 69' gt tueuodurr a8en8uel r"rau ur (arurf) arnsodxa3o lunourc Sunuu l,-9,sargeg'srf,ualurs,rlgderSa¡ar,

6tt 'Ltt

p¡qr

ro3

3€zz'ftt'fF

(srsar¡rodl¡1 porred pf,

nrr3)

por.rad alltrsues

frr

l3o¡ouqcar

(ffSf)

6t. >l1er

rrl{rerl

uolrnadar-31as

ü6r uon¡a.r¡o¡ Jor{lo sA uoDfJJJof,-JIas 3€zz 'oL'g9 spruaru8as

tt-€t

f

Stzz'

uoursrnb:e a8zn8uel tsry pue 's:ral looqrs

Blzz'6\t

;3rn3ue1 puoras

Blzz'L-9h '8rr 'lz

SurploJprs a8en8url

f,rcpruroJ

rrr

(aSen8ue¡ rrepur.roS) saunnor

Szzz' ot-6ot 8ur¡nl:n¡s¡¡ g-1,1, srrtsuatrrJ"r{f JOuJ?)l Surfpnrs ro3 zl, sanssr Surldures

Sf-6zt

raqreal

sJar{f,841

aas

uorrergrldrurs

€z a8en8uel u8rs

o[ s¡en8u¡rq pnuanb:s 9-46'r--az

rndul

Sulldru¿s roJ sloor paseg--rarnduoo

urooJsself, ur Jo esn (ef,uelrs

Bfzz'6gt '6fi aruaragrp rumgru8rs r-og .&oruaru ruJet-tJor{s

gz (g f,ruorDelJ lou srj¿runq aq ol spaau uonrsrnbre a8enSue¡

z/

otz'zg-LLt ls'Er sporlrauJ uonelsueJl .l¿ruureiS :uorl3nJtsur p:snroJ-ruJoJ :3ulu¿aru f(J'ISl) Surqoear a8en8uel

uo snf,oJ

prseq-ruaruor :(¡-13) Surgceer e nerruntuulor :qeeo.rdde

e8enSuel

¡en8uttotpne aar urooJssep'Surgrear

6-99 sar¡r:erd puone rlou,srrgrear

6-Stt uJooJsse]f, aqt ur Suluortsanb

Sh'Se-6zt suonf,?retur raurea]-Jeqf,eal üoz uolle,rnoru ur a¡or

3l.zz'oít 'S9r'L9 (¡19¡) Surgrear e8en8uq paseq-Ise¡ 3l.zz e?eníueln?rct Sezz'ol,'89 spruru8ase¡dns Slzz 'LLt 't Lt 'É-zt ruslpn8urlrq eluf,Blqns zt sporp)ru uorsJerugns suonf,EJJlur JauJEal

-Jertr¿)l

suorltrEJJtur tuaPnls-tusPnls

B€zzBurpzt? prnDnrrs iür sts¿¡¡¡ ur

tL'oL'69'99 lSolouoqd3o r:td

se

90? Poorsl)Pun 3¡asrnof SuueuJ ur aJueilodul1 ssarrs

9or'lg (lralxut)

ssa.rrs

(rrposo.rd)

6gr s¡erar porelntuns lrarre,L prrpuers

Stzz'lt

sa¡uanbas ¡eruarudo¡a,rap

suoDf,EJalur ruJpnrs-Jar{feer Surqc;easa; 69r (lpnrs aqr Suncage rar{l:eesal) xopered reqrleesel

Szzz'lSt' 6zr' 9g rpreasrr a¡u¿tnu¿nb Szzz 'lSt '6lt '6zt'98 q:rmsar aanrllpnb 6ü-6zr sauaqrs uone rasqo 98 srrpnts ¡eurpnrr8uo¡

ü-€fi

rl-6ir lgde:8ougr:

'zoz'zl

gL uopelarro:

z-tgt'S-lS

uollf,sJaluI lelfos

sosnelf,

a

DEIar

Szzz'Lgr '€l,r 'ür (suonenus

rurrarrP,*

6-Stt

I

'oÉr (suorrsanb aurnuaS¡ suonsanb ler]uergrr 9-ll tsed 01 aruargrr

fFr (rrposo.rd) ssals o8r .ssrPFrun, PUE .serpBeJ, Jo-t

9h' 6t-gl.{-roaqr ¡ernrprorcos ol-6fr e3¿n8uel'uollezlplf,os

e,ut:eds¡ad tsruon¡r.¡alur Jrlt pue

sarpnrs Teluaurradxa

/_\t sdno.¡3 uosr.¡eduroc Surpug ur lr¡n:grp 39rc'lbr sarpnrs a,rndrnsap 39tz' 9g s)rpnts leuor]fas-ssoJf, srnsrn8ur¡ sndror

39rc

6ü-6zr saruarps uolle Jesgo (ruoorsselc) Bltz'lSt r{rJEJsaJ uonre sPoqleu r{frEás3r 99 rJnr"al ¡lleru8e¡d se'stsenbJJ srdruo¡d Íuon?¡rrur oqa aas tlt uorlnada¡

a¿s sa8ets

oÉ-62 s.rap.rosrp a8en8ue¡ pue qcaads

r--olr e8uegf, pf,nrlodorf,os

""1T' l#:'JJll :1ffi

8-L8r sluroJ f,Ilsln8ulTolf,os Ér-zr a8en8ue¡ Jo sruroJ ¡enos Surureal sralooqcs-a.rd sf,IlsInSuIIoIfos Bezz' 69r'

l-üz

o€ spn8urlrg snoruellnurs r9r srepeer pag¡dru¡s

rr--orz {rsgPaTJo PUH uoruruof lsoru 16r a¡nou lou ftru srauJeel 'oLt suor¡ftJalul JaUJEJI-JJUJ?JI uI

t/t

6-9gr sruoo;sself, uorsJar¡JrrJr ur

xa?uJ

256

Indrx ofbeginning instrucdon in second language y,96-9, zo4-5 of corrective feedback r94 of form-focused instruction r9r transfer zz4g

see

cross-linguistic infuence

transfer-appropriate processing (TAP) rro, 191,2249

'two for one' r7r-7 rypographical enhancemenrs of input 163 UG (Universal Grammar) zo, to4-j,224g uptake r39, t4r, 142, t88, zz4g

rro-n

usage-based learning

usage-based perspectives on

child language

acquisition z8-9 variables, personal zz4g see learner characteristics variational features rt6, 177-9, zz4g varieties of languages 14, jr, 7r, 206, zz4g

'Yictor'zz

visual learners

83

vocabulary alnount needed for conversation 6r, t6z, 206 can be taught any dme r78 first language development of r4 growth through reading t6z learning strategies 64 second language learning 6o-4 wút time r47 wh-words rc-rz, 49-jI willingness to communicate (\lTC) 86, zz4g

word identification 6vz retrieval of word meanings ro9 word order adverb placement

t8-9

basic word o¡der and predictable development paths ry7, ry\, r79

word order and meaning rrr-rz

working memory czpacit¡ 8o-t, zz5g 'wug test' 8-9 younger the better (for starting second language instruction) y, 96-9, zo4-5 zone of proximal development (ZPD) zS,

tr8, zz5g

OXFORD lJNIVERSITY IRBSS

www.oup.com/elt

lsBN 97a 0 t9 454126-A

3iijfld.lk' oxfordenglishtestinq.com

il]il11ilililffiil[[illr